High Court

Prayagraj, 27 June (HS). The Allahabad High Court has said that if the acquisitions made under the Uttar Pradesh Housing and Development Council Act, 1965 before the implementation of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013, which have not been finalized by 01 January 2014, then the 2013 Act will be applicable for determining compensation for the land acquired from the landowners.

The court said that the Uttar Pradesh Housing and Development Council Act, 1965 empowers the Board to acquire any land for any purpose under the Act as per the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 provides that if no award has been made for acquisition of land under the erstwhile Act, the provisions of the 2013 Act shall apply for determination of compensation.

A bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta and Justice Kshitij Shailendra passed this order on a petition filed by Hem Chandra. The petition challenged the award of ADM (Land Acquisition) Agra. The court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in the case of UP Housing and Development Council vs. Zainul Islam and others. The larger bench of the Supreme Court has held that the beneficial provisions of the Amendment Act, 1984 relating to determination of compensation will be applicable to the acquisitions made under the Act, so as to protect it from arbitrariness and discrimination.

Since the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as amended from time to time, has been replaced by the new Act, 2013, the Court held that the affected persons would be entitled to compensation in accordance with the new Act, 2013, so as to save Section 55 of the Act from being declared unconstitutional on the touchstone of Article 14 of the Constitution. A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court held that for the purpose of determining compensation for acquisition under the Act, the amendment made in 1984 in the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 would apply.

This means that the amendments made by the 1984 Act to the L.A. Act relating to determination and payment of compensation, viz. Section 23(1-A) and Sections 23(2) and 28, as amended by the 1984 Act, would apply to acquisitions for the purpose of the Act under Section 55 of the Act. Further, in Union of India and others v. Tarsem Singh and others, the Supreme Court held that acquisitions made under other laws including the National Highways Act and the Land Acquisition Act cannot be treated differently. It held that landowners cannot be singled out if the State is making acquisitions under different laws.

Noting that the rate of compensation under the 2013 Act is much higher than that under the 1894 Act, the Court held that the provision under Section 24(1)(a) to provide compensation as per the new law where no award has been made is to protect the interests of the persons involved.

The High Court found that the award had been delayed by the Council for about 42 years. The High Court held that the compensation should have been determined as per the 2013 Act and not as per the old Act of 1894. Accordingly, the Court allowed the petition and the matter was remanded back to the opposite party for redetermination of compensation.