MANGLA TRADING CO Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition by 50 licensees of the new grain revenue market, Tauru, Gurgaon, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeking a direction to the Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board (Marketing Board) and the Market Committee, Tauru, hot to recover the amount of enhanced compensation from the petitioners.

(2.) STATE Government of Haryana acquired land measuring 33 acres 4 kanals and 2 marlas under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, "the Act") for establishing a new grain market at Tauru (District Gurgaon ). Notification Under Section 4 of the Act was issued on July 30, 1979 and award was made by the Land Acquisition Collector on March 13, 1986. Compensation was enhanced by Additional District Judge, Gurgaon on a reference petition filed Under Section 18 of the Act. Plots of land were sold by open auction and also by draw of lots for developing the grain market. Marketing Board decided to allot 50% plots and booths by open auction to general public, 45% by draw of lots to old licensees of Purani Mandi and 5% to persons belonging to SC/st category. There were 106 plots and 56 booths in the new grain market. Thus, 53 plots and 28 booths were to be sold by open auction. Petitioners were old licensees and, therefore, they applied for the purchase of plots by draw of lots. Purpose behind selling plots by draw of lots was to give place of business to the old licensees at a reasonable price. Plots were sold in public auction at the price of Rs. 1,36,000.00 and above, as against the reserved price fixed at Rs. 91,052.00 for a plot and Rs. 17,675.00 for a booth. Price claimed from the petitioners on allotment by draw of lots was Rs. 63,376.00 for a plot and Rs. 12,302.00 for a booth. The petitioners challenge to the demand of additional amount representing enhanced compensation is that, out of the total land measuring about 33 acres acquired by the State Government, shops and booths were constructed over an area measuring about 4 acres only. Allocation of land in the new grain market is said to be as under (in para 8 of the petition)

(3.) THE respondents have defended the demand of additional money from the petitioners on the ground that, in the allotment letters issued to the petitioners, price of plot was stated to be tentative and any enhancement in the cost of land under the Act was required to be paid by the allottees proportionately. It is pleaded by the respondents that since the petitioners accepted the terms and conditions of allotment, they were now estopped from raising any objection. 40% plots were sold by draw of lots to old licensees at the reserved price, 5% to persons belonging to SC category of Notified Market Committee and 5% to farmers of Notified Market Committee. As regards the contribution to Haryana Rural Development Fund, it is explained that the Marketing Board and the Market Committee had no concern with the same inasmuch as contributions received was deposited in the account of the said fund. It has been further argued by learned counsel for the respondents that the Marketing Board and the Market Committee have not sufficient fund to meet expenditures on development work and maintenance. Money spent on developing the grain market was required to be recovered from the allottees only. Whatever money was recovered by way of market fee, that was utilised for the upkeep and maintenance of the services and facilities. Demand for additional amount, representing enhanced compensation, has been made in accordance with the terms and conditions of allotment. The persons, who purchased plots in the open auction, cannot be asked to pay additional amount because there was no such condition in the allotment letters issued to them.