Kewal Ram Patel @APPELLANT@Hash Union of India

The instant bunch of writ petitions which involve a common controversy is being decided by this single order.

Learned counsel for the parties state that the controversy involved in the cases at hand is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by a Coordinate

Bench of this Court in the case of Man Singh & Ors. UOI & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13114/2016) decided on 27.03.2017, wherein this Court

held as below:-

“1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners are seeking directions to the respondents to re-determine the amount of compensation and other

benefits awarded by the competent authority for the land acquired, while complying with the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and

Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short “the Act of 2013â€​).

The facts relevant are that the petitioners’ land wasacquired under the provisions of National Highways Act, 1956 (for short “the Act of

1956â€). The competent authority determined the compensation in terms of the provisions of Section 3G of the Act of the Act of 1956. Precisely, the

grievance of the petitioners is that the award in question having been passed by the competent authority after 31.12.14 by virtue of sub-section (3) of

Section 105 inserted vide the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Amendment)

Ordinance, 2014, reincorporated vide the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement

(Amendment) Ordinance, 2015 and the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement

(Amendment) Second Ordinance, 2015, promulgated by the President of the Republic of India, the determination of the compensation was required to

be made in accordance with the provisions contained in First Schedule of the Act of 2013 whereas, the compensation has been determined by the

competent authority keeping in view the provisions of Section 3G of the Act of 1956.

It is not disputed by the counsels appearing for the Unionof India and the National Highway Authority before this court that by virtue of provisions

of sub-section (3) of Section 105 of the Act of 2013 in force at the relevant time, the competent authority was required to determine the compensation

payable to the petitioners for the land acquired, taking into consideration the components as set out in the First Schedule of the Act of 2013.

As a matter of fact, the issue regarding applicability of theprovisions of the Act of 2013 for determination of compensation in cases where land

acquisition proceedings were initiated under the Act of 1956 but, award has not been declared till 31st of December, 2014, was considered by the

Ministry of Road Transport & Highways and vide circular dated 3rd of February, 2016, while accepting the legal opinion tendered by Additional

Solicitor General of India, it has been clarified that even where the award of compensation under Section 3G of the Act of 1956 was declared by

competent authority on or before 31st of December,2014 but compensation in respect of majority of the land area notified in the relevant 3A

notification was not deposited in the account of beneficiaries on or before 31st of December, 2014, all the beneficiaries shall be entitled to

compensation in accordance with provisions of the Act of 2013.

It is not disputed that in the instant case, the award hasbeen passed after 31.12.14 and therefore, even otherwise, as per the categorical stand taken

by the Union of India and the National Highways Authority by virtue of provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 105 of the Act of 2013 in force at the

relevant time, the compensation payable to the petitioners for the land acquired has to be redetermined as per the provisions of the Act of 2013.

In this view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed ofwith the directions to the respondents to re-determine the amount of compensation payable

to the petitioners in accordance with the provisions of the Act of 2013. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from

the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. No order as to costs .â€​

Learned counsel thus submit that these writ petitions may also be decided in light of the aforesaid judgment.

Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of directing the respondents to redetermine the quantum of compensation payable to the petitioners in

accordance with the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

Requisite exercise in this direction shall be completed within a period of three months from the receipt of certified copy of this order.

The Notification No.NH-11011/30/2015-LA issued by the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways shall be kept in mind while redetermining the

compensation payable to the concerned land holder. The petitioners, if they so desired, may submit representation/s to the competent authority on the

aspect of redetermination of the compensation and it is expected that such representation/s shall be considered objectively and as per law while

quantifying the revised compensation.

With these observations and directions, the writ petitions as well as stay applications are disposed of.

A copy of this order be placed in each file.