High Court grants relief to farmers whose land was acquired for Patiala-Sangrur-Bathinda stretch

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, April 11

In a significant judgment liable to change the way relief is provided to owners for acquisition of their land, the Punjab and Haryana High Court today made it clear that the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, would apply to the cases where agencies deposited the announced award amount prior to December 31, 2014, but the compensation was not paid to majority of the acquired land holdings.

Compensation not paid

Provisions of the 2013 Act apply where agencies deposited award prior to December 31, 2014, but compensation was not paid to the majority. Justice Avneesh Jhingan

Justice Avneesh Jhingan was hearing 88 petitions by the Union of India/National Highways Authority of India and the landowners. The Bench was told that a notification under the National Highways Act, 1956, was issued on May 25, 2012, proposing to acquire land of 25 villages on the national highway-64 on Patiala-Sangrur-Bathinda stretch.

The Competent Authority for Land Acquisition (CALA) on January 15, 2014, determined the compensation amount. Aggrieved by the decision, arbitration was initiated at the instance of land owners and the proceedings culminated in award dated March 27, 2019. Both the NHAI and the landowners then moved the high court.

Appearing before Justice Jhingan’s Bench, the NHAI submitted that the 2013 Act would not apply to the acquisition. Justice Jhingan asserted ordinance number nine of 2013 was promulgated on December 31, 2014, extending the provisions of the 2013 Act to the cases of land acquisition “under the enactments specified in fourth schedule to the 2013 Act”, which mentioned the 1956 Act.

The Centre vide order dated August 28, 2015, extended the benefit of 2013 Act with regard to determination of compensation, rehabilitation and settlement to the land acquired under enactment mentioned in the fourth schedule.

Referring to the subsequent developments, Justice Jhingan asserted there was no dispute that the beneficial provisions of the 2013 Act were made applicable to the land acquired under the 1956 Act and the other enactments specified in fourth schedule from January 1, 2015.

Justice Jhingan added the issue in hand was whether the 2013 Act would apply to the cases where CALA announced the award and the amount was deposited by the acquiring agencies with the competent authority prior to December 31, 2014, but the compensation was not paid to majority of the acquired land holdings?

After considering different aspects and the provisions of both the Acts, Justice Jhingan asserted the beneficial provisions of the 2013 Act would also be applicable to the acquisition in question. The impugned orders and the award were also set aside.