TMI Blog1998 (1) TMI 521X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the Adhiniyam ). They raise common questions relating to the applicability of the provisions contained in the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as the 1984 Act ) to acquisition of land for executing the said scheme. 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 (hereinafter referred to as the LA Act ). As a result of the amendments in Sections 23(2) and 28 the solatium payable under Section 23(2) has been enhanced from 15% to 30% and the interest payable under Section 28 has been enhanced from 6% to 9% and 15%. 3. The Parishad is a housing and development board established under Section 3 of the Adhiniyam. Under Section 15 of the Adhiniyam one of the functions of the Board is to frame and execute housing and improvement schemes and other projects . In accordance with the provisions of the Adhiniyam the Parishad framed the Bhoomi Vikas Evam Grihasthan Yojana No. 10 between Meerut-Hapur and Meerut-Delhi Road in Meerut . By n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eduction should be one-third of the sum of ₹ 110. The High Court has, therefore, fixed the market value of the land at ₹ 73 per sq. yard. The cross-objections filed by the landowners have been dismissed. The High Court has, however, held that the amendments introduced in the LA Act by the 1984 are applicable to acquisition of land for the purposes of the Adhiniyam and the landowners are entitled to all the statutory benefits under the LA Act as amended by the 1984 Act so far as applicable to them. Feeling aggrieved by the said decision of the High Court, the Parishad had filed Civil Appeals Nos. 6343, 6383, 6358, 6368, 6353, 6370, 6369, 6371, 6363, 6357, 6361, 6356, 6376, 6359, 7646, 7361, 7362, 7363, 6373, 6374, 6375, 6352, 6382, 6347, 6354, 6344, 6345, 6355, 6350, 6362, 6364, 7357, 7358, 7360, 7359, 7356, 7644, 7364, 7365, 6351, 6349, 6377, 6372, 6365, and 6360 of 1995 before this Court. Feeling aggrieved by the reduction in the market value by the High Court some of the claimants have filed civil appeals arising out of Special Leave Petitions (Civil) Nos. 11170, 10512-10538, 10147 and 9549 of 1995. The claimants, who are respondents in Civil Appeals Nos. 6353 and 636 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted cost of the scheme does not exceed twenty lakh rupees and by the State Government if it exceeds the said amount. Sub-section (1) of Section 32 provides that whenever the Board or the State Government sanctions a housing or improvement scheme, it shall be notified in the Gazette and sub-section (2) lays down that the notification under sub-section (1) in respect of any scheme shall be conclusive evidence that the scheme has been duly framed and sanctioned. In cases where the scheme is sanctioned by the Board an appeal lies to the State Government against the decision of the Board under sub-section (3) of Section 32 and if the scheme is altered or cancelled by the State Government on such appeal the cancellation or alteration is required to be notified in the Gazette under sub-section (4) of Section 32. In Section 38 provision is made for transfer to the Board of any building or land or any street, or any part thereof, vested in a local authority which lies within the area comprised in any housing or improvement scheme and for payment by the Board to the local authority, as compensation, a sum equal to the market value of such land or building or both, as the case may be, as on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to be acquired under the Scheme, the same effect as publication in the Official Gazette of a notification under sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the LA Act. (iv) The publication of a notification under sub-section (1) or, as the case may be, under sub-section (4) of Section 32 of the Adhiniyam in the case of land acquired under any housing or improvement scheme under the Adhiniyam has been substituted for and shall have the same effect as a declaration by the State Government under Section 6 of the LA Act. (v) Sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the LA Act has been substituted. In sub-section (1), so substituted, it is provided that whenever the State Government so directs in the interest of the expeditious execution of housing or improvement scheme under the Adhiniyam, the Collector, though no such award has been made, may on the expiration of fifteen days from the publication of the notice mentioned in sub-section (1) of Section 9 take possession of any land needed for the purposes of the Adhiniyam and such land shall thereupon vest absolutely in the Government free from all encumbrances. (vi) Section 17-A has been inserted in the LA Act. The said provision reads as und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Explanation. - In judging the market value aforesaid in any case where the land acquired for or in connection with sanitary improvement or any kind or planned development due regard shall be had to the insanitary and unhygienic conditions of the land on the date aforesaid. The other amendment was the deletion of sub-section (2) of Section 23. 9. By the Land Acquisition (U.P. Amendment) Act, 1972 (U.P. Act No. 28 of 1972) (hereinafter referred to as the 1972 Act ) the LA Act, as application in the state of Utter Pradesh, was further amended and the Explanation that was inserted in sub-section (1) of Section 23 by the 1954 Act was omitted and sub-section (2) of Section 23 which was deleted by the 1954 Act was restored. This would show that in 1965 when the Adhiniyam was enacted solution @ 15% was not payable under Section 23 of the LA Act in respect of acquisition of land in the State of Uttar Pradesh when such acquisition was not for the purposes of the Union and while enacting the Adhiniyam the legislature made provision for payment of such solatium. Thus there was disparity in the matter of payment of solatium in respect of acquisition of land for the purposes of the Ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity of the 1984 Act to acquisition of land under the provisions of the Adhiniyam in the context of the first proviso to Section 6 of the LA Act which was substituted by the 1984 Act. By the said proviso it has been prescribed that no declaration in respect of any particular land covered by a notification under Section 4(1) published after the commencement of the Land Acquisition (Amendment and Validation) Ordinance, 1967, but before the commencement of the 1984 Act, shall be made after the expiry of three years from the date of the publication of the notification. In that case the notification under Section 28(1) of the Adhiniyam was published in the Gazette on 8-9-1973, 15-9-1973, and 22-9-1973 and the notification under Section 32(1) of the Adhiniyam was published on 27-8-1977, i.e., after the expiry of three years. A contention was raised that the notification under Section 32 was required to be issued within three years from the date of the notification under Section 28(1) on the basis of the first proviso to Section 6 of the earlier Act. It was urged that the amendment introduced in the LA Act by the 1984 Act, including the first proviso to Section 6, are applicable to acquisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applicable to acquisition for the purposes of the Adhiniyam also. The learned Judge, however, took note of the fact that the Parishad had entered into possession and had constructed housing colonies as there was no interim order in favour of the landowners during pendency of the writ petitions in the High Court and observed that larger social interest requires this Court to mould the relief in such a manner that justice may not suffer. He, therefore, held that even though publication of declarations under the Act were beyond the period of three years it was not in the interest of justice to quash the proceedings but the landowners should be paid compensation of the land acquired on market value prevalent in the year in which the declaration analogous to Section 6 of the earlier Act was published/issued by fictionally assuming that fresh notification under the Act analogous to Section 4 was issued in that year. 14. Another question that came up for consideration in Gauri Shankar Gaur ((1994) 1 SCC 92) was whether the provisions contained in the LA Act, as amended by Section 55 read with the Schedule to the Adhiniyam, have ceased to operate after the enactment of the 1984 Act in v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs reliance has been been placed on the judgment of Sahai, J. in Gauri Shankar Gaur ((1994) 1 SCC 92) and it has been submitted that the amendments introduced in the LA Act by the 1984 Act are applicable to an acquisition for the purposes of the Adhiniyam. 17. A subsequent legislation often makes a reference to the earlier legislation so as to make the provisions of the earlier legislation applicable to matters covered by the later legislation. Such a legislation may either be (i) a referential legislation which merely contains a reference to or the citation of the provisions of the earlier stature; or (ii) a legislation by incorporation whereunder the provisions of the earlier legislation to which reference is made are incorporated into the later legislation by reference. If it is a referential legislation the provisions of the earlier legislation to which reference is made in the subsequent legislation would be applicable as it stands on the date of application of such earlier legislation to matters referred to in the subsequent legislation. In other words, any amendment made in the earlier legislation after the date of enactment of the subsequent legislation would also be app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Uttar Pradesh, and has laid down that any land or any interest therein required by the Parishad for any of the purposes of the Adhiniyam may be acquired under the provisions of the LA Act as amended in its application to Uttar Pradesh which for this purpose has to be subject to the modifications specified in the Schedule to the Adhiniyam. A number of modifications have been made in the various provisions of the LA Act that have been made applicable in respect of acquisition for the purposes of the Adhiniyam. The publication of the notification under Section 28(1) of the Adhiniyam has been equated with a notice under sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the LA Act and the publication of a notification under Section 32(1) of the Adhiniyam has been equated with a declaration under Section 6 of the LA Act. As regards compensation modification has been made by inserting sub-section (2) in Section 23 of the LA Act, as it was applicable in the State of Uttar Pradesh. As pointed out earlier, in the LA Act, in its application to the State of Uttar Pradesh, insofar as it related to acquisitions of land except for the purposes of the Union, sub-section (2) of Section 23 had been deleted by virtue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Act and partly in a schedule attached to the Act. They are numerous and substantial and the effect is, in their Lordships' opinion to enact for the purposes of the local Act a special law for the acquisition of land by the trustees within the limited area over which their powers extend. * * * Their Lordships regard the local Act as doing nothing more than incorporating certain provisions from an existing Act, and for convenience of drafting doing so by reference to that Act, instead of setting out for itself at length the provisions which it was desired to adopt. 20. It was held that the amendment that was introduced in the LA Act in 1921 could not be regarded as incorporated in the Calcutta Improvement Act because the same was not part of the LA Act when the Calcutta Improvement Act was passed, nor part of the LA Act when the Calcutta Improvement anything to suggest that the Bengal Legislature intended to bind themselves to any future additions which might be made to the LA Act and that Act 19 of 1921 also did not contain any provision that the amendments enacted by it were to be treated as in any way retrospective or were to be regarded as affecting any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtain provisions from an existing Act and for convenience of drafting doing so by reference to that Act, instead of setting out for itself at length the provisions which it was desired to adopt. The scheme of Section 55 read with the Schedule to the Adhiniyam is not very different. 23. As regards the exceptional situations referred to in State M. P. v. M. V. Narasimhan ((1975) 2 SCC 377 1975 SCC (Cri) 589 (1976) 1 SCR 6) it may be stated that the Adhiniyam and the LA Act cannot be regarded supplemental to each other. The Adhiniyam contains provisions regarding acquisition of land which are complete and self-contained. Nor can the provisions in the Adhiniyam be said to be in pari materia with the LA Act because the Adhiniyam also deals with matters which do not fall within the ambit of the LA Act. It cannot also be said that the 1984 Act, expressly or by necessary intendment, applies the said amendments to the Adhiniyam. Can it be said that if the amendments made in the LA Act by the 1984 Act are not incorporated in the Adhiniyam it would be rendered unworkable ? Sahai, J. has expressed the view that the exceptional situations referred to in State of M. P. v. M. V. Narasimhan ((1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onstitutional. In support of the said submissions reliance has been placed on the decisions of this Court in State of M. P. v. G. C. Mandawar (AIR 1954 SC 493 (1955) 1 SCR 599); Prakash Amichand Shah v. State of Gujarat ((1986) 1 SCC 581 1985 Supp (3) SCR 1025) and Union of India v. Hari Krishan Khosla (1993 Supp (2) SCC 149). 25. It is no doubt true that in an appeal arising from a reference under Section 18 of the LA Act it is not open to the claimants to challenge the validity of he provisions of the law under which the reference has been made. But, at the same time, while construing the provisions of the Adhiniyam providing for acquisition of land for the purposes of the Adhiniyam, we cannot lose sight of the settled principle of statutory construction that if certain provisions of law, construed in one way, would make them consistent with the Constitution and another interpretation would render them unconstitutional, the Court would lean in favour of the former construction . (See Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (AIR 1962 SC 955 1962 Supp (2) SCR 769), at pp. 808, 809.) We would, therefore, examine whether the provisions of the Adhiniyam if they are so construed as to i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... challenged on the ground that the same were violative of the right to equality guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution inasmuch as the said provisions empowered the acquisition of land at prices lower than those that would have been payable if the lands had been acquired under the LA Act. The said challenge was upheld by the High Court and the provisions contained in the Improvement Trust Act, whereby Section 23 of the LA Act, as applicable to acquisition for the purpose of the Improvement Trust Act, were struck down on the ground of violation of Article 14 of the Constitution. The said decision of the High Court was upheld by this Court. This Court has referred to Section 17-A which had been inserted by way of modification as per the Schedule to the Improvement Trust Act and wherein it was provided that in every case referred to in Section 16 or Section 17, Collector shall, upon payment of the cost of acquisition, make over charge of the land to the Trust and the land shall thereupon vest in the Trust, subject to the liability of the Trust to pay any further costs which may be incurred on account of its acquisition . It was held that in view of Section 17-A, as inserted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h 6 of the Schedule to the Nagpur Improvement Trust Act. The reasons which weighed with this Court in striking down the provisions of the Nagpur Improvement Trust Act whereby Section 23 of the earlier Act had been modified in its application for the purpose of acquisition under the said Act would, therefore, equally apply while considering the constitutional validity of the provisions of the Adhiniyam whereunder the provisions of Section 23 of the LA Act have been modified under the Schedule to the Adhiniyam. 28. The principle laid down by this Court in State of M. P. v. G. C. Mandawar (AIR 1954 SC 493 (1955) 1 SCR 599) that Article 14 cannot be invoked when the alleged discrimination is on account of laws made by two different legislatures has no application in the present case because under the LA Act as well as under the provisions of the Adhiniyam the acquisition is to be made by the same authority, viz., the State Government of Uttar Pradesh, and discrimination arises on account of action taken by the same authority. 29. The decision in Prakash Amichand Shah v. State of Gujarat ((1986) 1 SCC 581 1985 Supp (3) SCR 1025) on which reliance has been placed by Shri Sanyal on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of such land. Since the Court was not dealing with an acquisition under Section 11 of the Bombay Town Planning Act the decision in Prakash Amichand Shah ((1986) 1 SCC 581 1985 Supp (3) SCR 1025) has no application. 30. Union of India v. Hari Krishan Khosla (1993 Supp (2) SCC 149) relates to acquisition under the provisions of Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952. Section 8(3) of the said Act did not provide for payment of solatium @ 15% and interest @ 6% on acquisition of requisitioned lands. The validity of Section 8(3) was challenged on the ground that it was violative of Article 14 of the Constitution and reliance was placed on Nagpur Improvement Trust ((1973) 1 SCC 500 (1973) 3 SCR 39). The said challenge was negatived by the Court on the ground that cases of acquisition of land stood on a different footing than those where such property is subject to prior requisition before acquisition . This decision also does not lend any assistance to the submissions of Shri Sanyal. 31. Since the present case involves acquisition of land under the provisions of the LA Act as applicable under the Adhiniyam, it is fully covered by the law laid down by this C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Section 55 of the Adhiniyam. 32. In view of the construction placed by us on the provisions of Section 55 of the Adhiniyam that the provisions of the LA Act, as amended by the 1984 Act relating to determination and payment of compensation, would be applicable to acquisition of land for the purposes of the Adhiniyam, it is not necessary to deal with the submission that if the provisions of the 1984 Act are held to be not applicable in the matter of acquisition of land for the purposes of the Adhiniyam the provisions of the LA Act, as applicable under the Adhiniyam, would be void on the ground of repugnance under Article 254 of the Constitution. 33. As regards the determination of the market value of the lands in question, it may be stated that the said market value has to be determined with reference to 27-8-1983, the date of publication of the notification under Section 28 of the Adhiniyam, which has been equated with a notification under Section 4(1) of the LA Act. The area of the land acquired is more than 200 acres. It lies within the municipal limits of the city of Meerut and is adjacent to Indira Nagar, Shiv Shakti Nagar and Shiv Sagar Colony. The Land Acquisition Offi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by developed area with buildings and pucca roads and other facilities and has the advantage of road passing by the side, it has potentiality of developing though it cannot be treated to have similar advantages as the land in the developed areas. The High Court has also taken note of the fact that the entire acquired area was used for the purpose of agriculture even in 1983 when the surrounding areas had already developed. In the light of the aforesaid circumstances the High Court held that the rates available for land in developed area could not be adopted for determination of market value of the acquired land though they can be used for guidance to determine the market value by taking note of other circumstances as available on record. Referring to the exemplar dated 24-2-1983 relied upon by the landowners in respect of a plot measuring 260 sq. yards which reflected a rate of ₹ 110 per sq. yard, the High Court has stated that the said land was below 4 to 5 ft. of the road level and that in the absence of any material as to any other disadvantage, this disadvantage of a piece of land could be given due weight to hold that such small strips of an area of 260 per sq. yards in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... find any ground to interfere with the said determination by the High Court fixing the value at ₹ 110 per sq. yard. 37. The direction about deduction of one-third of the said price towards cost of development for the housing scheme involving construction of roads and other amenities is in consonance with the various decisions of this Court wherein this Court has allowed one-third deduction in the price towards cost of development. (See Tribeni Devi v. Collector of Ranchi ((1972) 1 SCC 480 (1972) 3 SCR 208); Vijay Kumar Moti Lal v. State of Maharashtra ((1981) 2 SCC 719); Special Land Acquisition Officer v. V. T. Velu ((1996) 2 SCC 538); K. S. Shivadevamma v. Asstt. Commr. Land Acquisition Officer ((1996) 2 SCC 62); Basant Kumar v. Union of India ((1996) 11 SCC 542).) 38. In Kausalya Devi Bogra ((1984) 2 SCC 324 (1984) 2 SCR 900) on which reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the claimants, this Court has laid down that for determining the market value of a large property on the basis of sale transactions for a small property a deduction should be given and that while in Special Land Acquisition Officer v. T. Adinarayana Setty (AIR 1959 SC 429 1959 Supp (1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the High Court dated 7-2-1996 whereby the High Court has dismissed the application for interim relief submitted by the Parishad. 43. It has been pointed out that while passing the said orders the High Court has proceeded on the basis that the provisions of the LA Act, as amended by the 1984 Act, are applicable and enhanced solatium @ 30% and interest @ 9% and 15% is payable in respect of acquisition of lands by the Parishad on the basis of notifications published under Section 28 of the Adhiniyam. 44. In view of the construction placed by us provisions of Section 55 of the Adhiniyam relating to acquisition of land for the purposes of the Adhiniyam, we do not find merit in these appeals and the same are, therefore, dismissed. No order as to costs. (D) Special Leave Petitions (Civil) Nos. 20601 and 20599 of 1995 45. These special leave petitions are directed against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated 28-10-1994 whereby the appeals filed by the Parishad against the judgments of the Additional District Judge, Meerut, in reference under Section 18 of the LA Act have been dismissed. In the impugned judgment the High Court has proceeded on the basis that the ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
