CENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for the petitioner as well as counsel for the State. Private respondents had earlier appeared and upon death of the private respondent no. 4, a substitution petition was filed being I.A No. 2508 of 2008, which was rejected as not pressed vide order dated 6.3.2012. Today the case is being decided on merit in the presence of counsel for the petitioner as well as counsel for the State. Petitioner is aggrieved by the judgment dated 8.8.2005 passed in Land Reference Case No. 74 of 1989 by the learned Sub Judge II, Hazaribag and the award made pursuance thereto under the Land Acquistion Act, 1894. According to the petitioner the land of khata no. 1, plot nos.213/2,213/1 and 213/3 measuring 5.78 acres of village Pindra , P.S. Mandu, Dist. Hazaribag was acquired by the State Government for which notification under Section 4 of the Act was published in the local gazette of Hazaribag dated 2.3.1987. After the acquisition proceeding the award amount was deposited by the petitioner in the office of District Land Acquisition Officer, Hazaribag for the purpose of payment to the land losers/ awardees. The claimant, on being dissatisfied filed an objection under Section 18 before the Collector. Thereafter, on reference made by the Collector for re-fixation of the compensation amount Land Reference case No. 74/89 was registered before the court of Sub Judge II, Hazaribag in which the notices were issued to the claimant as well as to the State. However it is categorically stated that no notice was issued to the petitioner nor he was impleaded as party for whose purpose the land was acquired and upon whom the burden of compensation was sought to be passed on. Learned court, thereafter, passed the judgment dated 8.8.2005 in reference case no. 74/89 enhancing the compensation as per the double of the market rate to the tune of Rs. 3,80,726 besides solatium, interest and other statutory benefits . Petitioner was completely in dark of such judgment and thereafter, award was separately prepared and published. However, petitioner only came to know of the judgment in question and the award prepared thereafter, when he received the letter no. 53 dated 13.4.2006 from the District Land Acquisition Officer, Hazaribag asking him to deposit the said amount or proceed before an appropriate forum (Annexure-3). Learned counsel for the petitioner, in this circumstance has relied upon judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India reported in AIR 1990 SC 1321 in the case of Neelagangabai and another Vrs. State of Karnataka and others. He has also relied upon the judgment of this court reported in 2010(4) JCR 191(Jhr) in the case of Central Coalfields Ltd. Vrs. State of Jharkhand & ors. in another reference case wherein also the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India referred to supra has been relied upon. By referring to the aforesaid judgment it has been submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has categorically held when the land was admittedly acquired for the purpose of respondent- corporation the burden of compensation is only on the corporation, it was mandatory for the court of reference to have caused a notice served on the respondent- Corporation before proceeding to determine the compensation claim. In such circumstance the judgment rendered in the reference case was held to be illegal and not binding upon the corporation. Para 3 of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to supra is quoted herein below:-

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties, gone through the relevant materials on record including the impugned award. The undisputed fact which are borne of record and from the submissions of the parties is that in a reference under Section 18 filed by the objector- claimant a reference case no. 74 of 1989 has been decided by the reference Court i.e. Sub Judge-2, Hazaribag without impleading the petitioner- CCL or any notice to it while enhancing the compensation to the tune of Rs. 3,80,726. The award prepared thereafter was sought to be executed by directing the petitioner to deposit the enhanced amount by the District Land Acquisition Officer, Hazaribag by letter dated 13.4.2006. In the aforesaid circumstance, the impugned judgment and the award issued thereto, no notice or opportunity to the petitioner was given who was supposed to bear the burden of enhancement of compensation. In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the judgment referred herein supra, this court, therefore is inclined to quash the judgment dated 8.8.2005 in reference Case No. 74/89 and award made pursuant thereto. Accordingly, the impugned judgment and award are quashed. However, the reference court shall decide the matter afresh after giving petitioner- C.C.L notice to opportunity to lead evidence on the question of enhancement of compensation in accordance with law. The writ petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms.