9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (5) TMI 1220 - SC - Indian LawsSeeking direction to consider 25% of developed land and compensation - original khatedars have prayed for payment of compensation to them - Khatedars have claimed that they are 'Bairwa' by caste which is a Scheduled Caste notified under the Constitution Scheduled Castes Order, 1950 - HELD THAT - In the instant case, notice Under Section 12(2) was issued to the Society by the Special Officer on 31.12.1988, treating the Society as 'person interested' and informing that an award had been passed on 30.11.1982 in accordance with Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act. On the strength of the aforesaid notices it was urged on behalf of the Society that the limitation to seek the reference would commence from the date of receipt of the notices issued and received on 31.12.1988. The reference sought was within the period of limitation. In the instant case it is apparent that the Housing Society had preferred objections and was aware of the land acquisition process and determination of compensation and has filed objections which stood rejected on 4.9.1982. Thus, the constructive knowledge of the award is fairly attributable to it when it was so passed. Constructive notice in legal fiction signifies that the individual person should know as a reasonable person would have - On a conjoint reading of Sections 12(2) and 18(2) of the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act, it was not open to the LAO to refer the case to the civil court on the basis of the time barred application. In the instant case, the transaction is ab initio void that is right from its inception and is not voidable at the volition by virtue of the specific language used in Section 42 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act. There is declaration that such transaction of sale of holding shall be void . As the provision is declaratory, no further declaration is required to declare prohibited transaction a nullity. No right accrues to a person on the basis of such a transaction. The person who enters into an agreement to purchase the same, is aware of the consequences of the provision carved out in order to protect weaker sections of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. In the instant case, even the prevalent instructions which have been modified did not confer any right on the Society or the Khatedars to claim the developed land. It was not a case of surrender of land; thus there was no question of the provisions of the circular being applied as the circular was in the form of guidelines for future acquisitions where Khatedars surrendered their lands and award has not been passed. The High Court has rejected the application under Order 1 Rule 10 filed by the Khatedars. In the facts of this case, particularly when the issue of violation of Section 42 of Rajasthan Tenancy Act was raised by the State Government and reference was also as to the award passed in 1982 in favour of Khatedars in which the Society was denied the right to receive compensation. Obviously, Khatedars were required to be heard as the adjudication of their right was involved in the matter to decide to whom the compensation is payable, and whether the Society was entitled to claim compensation on the basis of void transaction - In order to protect the interest of the Scheduled Caste persons, we further direct that the Society or other intermeddler, or power of attorney holder shall not be paid compensation on their behalf and the Collector/Land Acquisition Officer to ensure that the compensation is disbursed directly to the Khatedars or their legal representatives, as the case may be, and that they are not deprived of the same by any unscrupulous devices of land grabbers etc. Let the compensation be disbursed within a period of three months from today along with other permissible statutory benefits. The direction issued by the High Court to grant 25% of the developed land is hereby set aside - appeals preferred by the Rajasthan Housing Board and the Khatedars are allowed.
Issues Involved:
1. Entitlement to compensation and allotment of developed land. 2. Validity of transactions under Section 42 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act. 3. Limitation period for seeking reference under the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act. 4. Determination of compensation amount. 5. Applicability of government circulars for allotment of developed land. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Entitlement to Compensation and Allotment of Developed Land: The appeals challenge a High Court judgment directing consideration of 25% developed land allotment and compensation. The Rajasthan Housing Board sought to set aside this direction, while original khatedars sought compensation. The Society claimed higher land value and compensation based on agreements with khatedars. The Supreme Court found the Society's claim to compensation invalid due to void transactions under Section 42 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act. 2. Validity of Transactions Under Section 42 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act: The Society's agreements with khatedars were void as khatedars belonged to the Scheduled Caste "Bairwa." Section 42 prohibits land transfers from Scheduled Caste members to non-Scheduled Caste members. The Society, a juristic person, cannot claim the status of a Scheduled Caste member. The transactions were declared null and void, and the Society was not entitled to compensation. 3. Limitation Period for Seeking Reference Under the Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act: The Society's reference application was barred by limitation. The award was passed on 30.11.1982, and the Society had constructive notice of the award. The notice issued on 31.12.1988 was unnecessary and did not extend the limitation period. The Society's objections were rejected on 4.9.1982, confirming its lack of right, title, or interest in the land. 4. Determination of Compensation Amount: The Reference Court initially determined compensation at Rs. 260 per sq.yd., which the High Court reduced to Rs. 100 per sq.yd. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's determination, finding it appropriate based on documentary evidence. The oral evidence was deemed insufficient to alter the compensation amount. 5. Applicability of Government Circulars for Allotment of Developed Land: The High Court's direction to consider allotment of 25% developed land based on a 2005 circular was invalid. The circular applied only to future acquisitions where khatedars surrendered their land without compensation. The Supreme Court found the circular inapplicable to the case at hand and set aside the High Court's direction. The Society's reliance on the circular was misplaced, and no negative equality could be claimed based on a concession made in another case. Conclusion: The Supreme Court allowed the appeals by the Rajasthan Housing Board and khatedars, setting aside the High Court's direction for land allotment. The Society's appeals were dismissed, and the compensation was directed to be disbursed directly to the khatedars or their legal representatives within three months. The parties were to bear their own costs.
|
