SAVITRI TEA ESTATE Vs. OIL INDIA LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, respondent No.5 in Civil Rule No. 400/94 is in appeal being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 12.4.2000 passed therein whereby the learned Single Judge hads set aside and quashed the decision of the Deputy ' Commissioner, Dibrugarh directing the writ petitioner (Respondent No. 1 herein) to pay a sum of Rs. 8,14,650/- being the value of the tea bushes and the land measuring 11B, 2K, 4L for the acquisition thereof.

(2.) We have heard Mrs. M. Hazarika, Advocate assisted by Ms. A. Islam for the appellant and Mr. A.K. Bhattacharjee, Learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. K. Agarwal, for the Respondent No.1 Mrs. A. Hazarika, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam represented the Respondent No.2.

(3.) The pleaded facts deserve attention to comprehend the issues involved. According to the writ petitioner-respondent No. 1, M/s Oil India Ltd., it being in urgent need of land for the purpose of exploration of Oil and Natural Gas, on 15.10.80 applied to the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Revenue Department for acquiring about 1 IB, 2K/4L of land situated within the area of Bazaloni T.E. under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). As it was in pressing need of the land, it also applied on 16.10.80 to the Deputy Commissioner, Dibrugarh under Rule 190 of the Rules framed under Section 155(f) of the Assam Land and Regulations, 1886 (hereinreferred to as the 'Regulations') for handing over immediate possession thereof. It repeated its request on 9.8.82. An enquiry thereafter, was conducted by the Collector, Dibrugarh under Rule 4 of the Land Acquisition (Companies) Rules, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules'. In course of which two sittings on 16.8.82 and 24.8.82 were held between the officials of the parties. During the discussion in the meeting held on 24.8.82, it was agreed upon by the parties that the compensation in respect of the land measuring 11 B, 2K and 4L would be payable at the rate of Rs. 2000/- per bigha and compensation in respect of surface damage would be paid in terms of Krishnamurty Formula of 1972 along with 15% additional compensation as per the provisions of the Act. The amount in terms of the agreement was computed to be Rs. 63,215.46. The writ petitioner/respondent No.1 contended that it accordingly deposited the said amount on 24.9.82 vide Treasury Challan of the same date. The appellant thereafter handed over the possession of the land to the Special Land Acquisition Officer who in turn delivered the land to the writ petitioner/respondent No.1 on 29.10.82 acknowledging the receipt of Rs. 63,215.46 without any objection. A formal document for handing over and taking over the possession of the land was prepared and was signed by Smti. VandanaRasiwasia, the attorney of the appellant, Special Land Acquisition Officer, Dibrugarh and the Land Officer of the writ petitioner. Therein, while acknowledging the receipt of the payment of the aforesaid amount and while confirming the delivery of the possession of the land, the said attorney on behalf of the appellant gave an undertaking that the sale deed transferring the said land in favour of the writ petitioner would be executed and registered on receipt of the balance amount of compensation for tea bushes after finalisation of the revised rate by the Government. Subsequent thereto, the Additional Deputy Commissioner requested the Govt. to expedite the sending of the new formula so as to finalise the process for payment. A writ petition was also filed thereafter being Civil Rule No.25/85 by the appellant before this court for directing the State of Assam to recast the Krishnamurty Formula for assessing the compensation for tea bushes only and the writ petitioner-Oil India Ltd. to pay the balance amount of compensation with interest. This court eventually by order dated 3.9.90 disposed of the Civil Rule directing the Deputy Commissioner, Dibrugarh to assess the damages for payment of compensation in terms of the directions contained in the judgment rendered in Oil and Natural Gas Commission, Eastern Region, Nazira, petitioner Vs Assam Board pf Revenue and others, respondents, (1989) 1 GLR 223. The appellant next filed an application on 31.3.92 before the Deputy Commissioner, Dibrugarh for assessment of compensation payable to it by the writ petitioner. This was followed by another application, whereby an amount of Rs. 40,86,825.60 was claimed as compensation for the land at the rate of Rs. 1,20,0007- per bigha together with interest and solitium. Other amounts towards surface compensation and loss of earnings were also claimed. The writ petitioner submitted objections setting out the aforementioned facts contending inter alia that the amount of Rs. 63,215.46 as computed had already been paid towards the value of the land and that of the tea bushes on the basis of the Krishnamurty Formula and that what remained to be paid was only the compensation for the tea bushes at the enhanced rate, as and when revised by the Govt. It contended that the value of the land as agreed to by the parties was assessed at the rate of Rs.2000/- per bigha and that the appellant was not entitled to any further amount as claimed by it except the compensation for the tea bushes at the enhanced rate fixed by the Government as agreed to in the meeting dated 24.8.82. It is the case of the writ petitioner that thereafter on 3.9.93 a further amount of Rs.90,855.02 being the balance compensation amount in respect of 12132 Nos of tea bushes at the rate of Rs. 10/ - per bush was paid in compliance of this court's order dated 3.9.90 passed in Civil Rule No.25/ 85. The amount was duly received by the appellant without any objection. While the matter rested at that, the writ petitioner was served with the impugned memo dated 14.12.93 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Dibrugarh directing it to pay a sum of Rs.8,14,650/- being the compensation for the aforementioned land and the tea bushes thereof. This letter was accompanied by an order dated 30.11.92 passed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Dibrugarh holding that the writ petitioner was liable to pay the value of the land at the rate fixed by the Deputy Commissioner, Dibrugarh vide order dated 20.6.92 and for the tea bushes as per the revised rate of Krishnamurty Formula communicated by the Government in 1989. From the communication dated 14 12.93 it appeared that the value of the land was taken to be Rs.60,000/- per bigha as assessed by the Deputy Commissioner, Dibrugarh by his order dated 20.6.92. Being aggrieved, the writ petition was filed assailing the orders dated 30.11.92 and 14.12.93. In the counter of the appellant, it is contended that the discussions held in the meeting dated 24.8.82 was limited to the handing over of the land in question under Rules 189 and 190 of the Settlement Rules framed under the Regulations and did not relate to the value thereof forpurpose of transfer of title therein in favour of the writ petitioner. The compensation accordingly was worked out by applying the Krishnamurty Formula for compensation as contemplated under Rules 189 and 190. According to it, Rs. 2000/- per bigha was misconstrued to be the rate/value of the land. It was fixed only for computing the surface of compensation to be paid under the provisions of the aforesaid Rules. It asserted that the undertaking given by the Attorney of the appellant was also misinterpreted and it was obvious that the execution of the said deed would follow the payment of the consideration price of the land. Its stand was that the value of the land for sale thereof had not been paid by the writ petitioner and therefore no sale deed had been executed in its favour. The amount received was only by way of surface compensation under Rules 189 and 190. In its counter it referred to a meeting held on 11.12.89 between the officials of the Oil India Ltd. and the State Administration for fixing the uniform value of the lands acquired by the Oil India Ltd. wherein after a threadbare discussion the value of different categories of land was fixed. The value of land in the rural area was to be computed at the rate of Rs.60,000/- per bigha exclusive of the surface compensation. Later, the Deputy Commissioner, Tinsukia on 25.2.91 informed the authorities of the Oil India Ltd. that the value as fixed would be applicable in the district of Tinsukia as well, In response thereto, the Oil India Ltd. requested the Deputy Commissioner, Tinsukia to expedite fixing of the land value on the basis of the valuation made, in order to enable it to pay the calculated price to the affected persons. It was thereafter, that a communication dated 20.6.92 was issued by the District Collector and Deputy Commissioner, Dibrugarh to the effect that the valuation of the land acquired/taken over by the Oil India Ltd. in the years prior to 1990 and pending for payment of land value would be made as per the rates set out therein. The rates were as fixed in the meeting dated 11.12.89. The appellant, therefore, maintained that the writ petitioner was liable to pay the compensation amount for the land at the rate fixed by the said order and for the tea bushes as per the revised rate.