GOVERNMENT OF PEPSU Vs. PRATAP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the State and the Patiala Biscuit Manufacturers, Limited, Rajpura, from the judgment and decree of the District Judge, Patiala, dated 29 -12 -2006, affirming those of the Sub -Judge 2nd Class Patiala, raises some important questions of Law, particularly whether the Patiala Biscuit Manufacturers Limited, hereinafter called the Company for whom the Patiala Government had acquired the land of the plaintiff was a 'person interested' falling within the definition of those words given in Section 2 sub -clause (b) of the Patiala Land Acquisition Act 1995 (No. III (3) of 1995) whereby the law for acquisition of land for State purposes, for local bodies and for Companies was consolidated in the Patiala State and whether the Revenue Commissioner Patiala, acting under Section 19 of that Act had jurisdiction to entertain and hear the appeal of the Company against the award of the Collector regarding the compensation to be paid to persons interested in the land acquired.

(2.) IT is contended by the learned counsel of the appellants that the term 'person interested' has been wrongly construed by the learned District Judge to exclude the Company, that the word 'includes' in the definition of the term 'interested person' given in Clause (b) of Section 2 has a more comprehensive scope and enlarged indication and that the said definition presumably applies to a person whose liability to pay compensation would be materially affected if the acquiring Collector fixes the price of the land at an unusually higher rate than the market -value. It is further argued that as Section 34. sub -section (2) of the Patiala Land Acquisition Act gives the Company the right to adduce evidence before the Collector so that he could determine the amount of compensation payable by it, the Company is a necessary party to the proceedings before the Collector and is, therefore, a 'person interested' entitled to appeal if the amount fixed by the award of the Collector is unacceptable.

(3.) ON reading the provisions of the Patiala Land Acquisition Act it would be evident and it is also conceded by the counsel of the appellants, that when acting under the Act the Collector functions as the agent of the Government and it is in that capacity that he fixes the compensation to be tendered by the Government to the persons interested in the land. He has, however, the power to enforce the attendance of persons who may be able to give evidence regarding the matter which he is authorised to enquire into. If the Collector, in the capacity of an agent of the Government, fixes a rate according to which the value of the land is to be calculated, the Government must be bound by the award that its own agent gives if it desires to obtain the land.