1998 (1) TMI 521 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Applicability of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 to acquisitions under the Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965.
2. Determination of market value and compensation for acquired land.
3. Constitutional validity of the provisions of the Adhiniyam in light of Article 14 of the Constitution.

Summary:

1. Applicability of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984:
The appeals were directed against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court, which dealt with the applicability of the provisions contained in the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 (the 1984 Act) to the acquisition of land for housing schemes framed by the U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad under the Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965 (the Adhiniyam). The amendments introduced by the 1984 Act include insertion of sub-section (1-A) in Section 23 and amendment of Sections 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the LA Act), enhancing solatium and interest rates.

The Supreme Court held that the amendments introduced in the LA Act by the 1984 Act relating to determination and payment of compensation would apply to acquisitions for the purposes of the Adhiniyam. The Court reasoned that the intention of the legislature while enacting the Adhiniyam was to confer benefits relating to determination and payment of compensation, and thus, the provisions of the LA Act as amended by the 1984 Act should be applicable.

2. Determination of Market Value and Compensation:
The market value of the land in question was determined with reference to the date of publication of the notification u/s 28 of the Adhiniyam, equated with a notification u/s 4(1) of the LA Act. The Land Acquisition Officer had determined the market value at Rs. 30 per sq. yard, while the civil court fixed it at Rs. 150 per sq. yard with a 10% deduction for development. The High Court reduced the market value to Rs. 110 per sq. yard and directed a one-third deduction, fixing the market value at Rs. 73 per sq. yard.

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's determination, stating that the deduction of one-third for development costs was reasonable and in consonance with previous decisions of the Court.

3. Constitutional Validity:
The writ petitions challenged the constitutional validity of the provisions of the Adhiniyam as modified, arguing that they resulted in reduced compensation compared to the LA Act as amended by the 1984 Act, thus violating Article 14 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court, construing the provisions of the Adhiniyam to incorporate the amendments introduced by the 1984 Act, held that the provisions of the Adhiniyam would not result in arbitrary and hostile discrimination. Consequently, the writ petitions were dismissed.

Additional Appeals and Special Leave Petitions:
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals filed by the Parishad and the landowners, as well as the special leave petitions, affirming that the provisions of the LA Act as amended by the 1984 Act would apply to acquisitions under the Adhiniyam.