STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER Vs. RAGHUVEER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil miscellaneous appeal has been filed in this court by the above-named appellants under Sec. 54 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (Act No. 1 of 1894) hereinafter referred to as Act of 1894 against the order dated 28-7-1992 passed by Civil Judge-cum-Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jaipur District, Jaipur in reference case No. 17/83 whereby the reference preferred by the -respondent under Section 18 of the Act against the award dated 29/30-6-1983 of the Officer on Special Duty, Urban Development and Housing Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur in case No. 1/82 was accepted. Agrrieved by the impugned order of the Civil Judge-cum-Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jaipur District, Jaipur, the State of Rajasthan as well as the Rajasthan Housing Board, Jaipur have preferred this civil misc. appeal before this court.

(2.) The brief facts giving rise to the filling of this appeal are that the State Government acquired the land forming part of khasra No. 177 measuring 50 bighas situated in village Jhalana Ghod which in the revenue records was in the khatedari of Raghuveer Singh claimant-respondent for Rajasthan Housing Board for Mansarover Housing Scheme. On 12-1-1982 a notification was issued under Section 4 of the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act, 1953 by the State Government which was published in Rajasthan Gazette dated 13-1-1982 and the land comprising of six villages was acquired which also included the land measuring 933.3 bighas situated in village Jhalana Chod out of which the land measuring 50 bighas belonging to the respondent Raghuveer Singh forming part of khasra No. 177 was also acquired. Pursuant to the publication of the notification the State Government keeping in view the public purposes of acquisition of the land in question in exercise of its power under Section 17 (4) of the Act possession of the land was taken on 24-5-1982. The claimant-respondent filed an application for compensation before the Land Acquisition Officer, i.e. O.S.D. Urban Development and Housing Department, Jaipur in which he claimed the compensation of the land at the rate of Rs. 30,000/- per bigha. Apart from compensation of the land the respondent also claimed a sum of Rs. 1,00,000.00 for well, Rs. 10,000/- for labour quarters which were situated on the land, Rs. 15,000/- for cement drains, Rs.3000/- on account of cattle fodder (Pule). The respondent also claimed Rs. 70,000/- towards development of the land. Amount at the rate of 10% on account of compulsory acquisition and interest was also claimed. The O.S.D. did not pass award as claimed by the respondent and awarded only compensation of the land at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per bigha in view of the potentiality value of the land. So far as amount on account of other heads is concerned, he awarded Rs. 1,00,000/- for well, Rs.1012/- for electric room, Rs. 6166.90 on account of sandwall, Rs.982/- for huts, Rs.570/- for small water-tank and Rs. 9200/- for trees. He further awarded interest at the rate of Rs. 4% per annum for the period from 24-5-83 to 29-6-83. Thus, the O.S.D. awarded total amount of Rs. 10,94,036/- only. Being dissatisfied with the award passed by the O.S.D. the respondent Raghuveer Singh filed a reference application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.

(3.) It was submitted by the respondent-claimant that claim awarded by the O.S.D. was low and tie claimed that full compensation as claimed should have been awarded. It was submitted that although the land was barani land in revenue records but it was developed and was being cultivated by the respondent as he had spent substantial amount for its development. i.e., rupees two lakhs for development of this land, for well and other purposes and, therefore, the land was irrigated land. He further prayed that as per market value of the irrigated land compensation should be awarded at the rate of Rs. 50,000/- per bigha, although he has claimed only Rs. 30,000/- per bigha. The respondent has placed on record the various copies of the sale deeds of various khatedar-tenants who sold their land in the year 1971, 1972, 1980 and 1981 for the purpose of determination of the land value of the present case. The O.S.D. without giving any reasons did not agree to award compensation as per the market value of the land as mentioned in these documents. The respondent had also submitted a statement prepared by *he retired engineer (valuer) and engineer consultant and his statement was also recorded before the O.S.D. who did not believe the same.