Case Note & Summary
This appeal by special leave arose from a judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in revision petitions concerning compensation for land acquired under the Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959. The appellants were landowners whose land was acquired by the State of Rajasthan for urban development. The acquisition was initiated by a notification under Section 52 of the Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959, published on 10.10.1974, acquiring 39875 acres of land. Possession of the land was taken on the same day. The Additional Collector by award dated 18.4.1980 determined the market value at Rs. 13.50 per square yard. Aggrieved by this low compensation, the appellants filed appeals under Section 54 of the Act, claiming higher compensation along with solatium and interest. The Government also filed appeals against the Collector's award of 10% interest. The District Judge, by common award and decree dated 9.2.1983, enhanced the compensation to Rs. 49.50 per square yard but reduced the interest from 10% to 6% from 10.10.1974. The appellants then filed revision petitions before the High Court, which were dismissed on 22.7.1984, leading to the present appeal. The core legal issues were whether Sections 52(2) and 53(6)(a) of the Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959 were void as inconsistent with the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act 68 of 1984, and to what extent the appellants were entitled to solatium, interest, and additional amount under the amended Land Acquisition Act for pending proceedings. The appellants argued that the state provisions were inconsistent and void, seeking solatium at 30%, higher interest, and additional amount under Section 23(1-A). The State relied on the State Amendment Act 29 of 1987, which inserted Section 60-A to protect past actions and apply the Central Act prospectively from 1.8.1987. The Supreme Court refused to entertain the constitutional challenge since it was raised for the first time in appeal and not pursued before the High Court. The Court noted the legislative intention under Section 60-A: actions taken under the old State Act before the commencement of the Central Amendment Act 68 of 1984 were not to be reopened, but further proceedings from the date of commencement of the State Amendment Act were to be governed by the Land Acquisition Act. Under the old State Act, before 24.9.1984, no solatium was payable because Section 53(6)(a) omitted solatium and Section 52(2) provided only 6% simple interest. Following Union of India v. Raghubir Singh, enhanced solatium would be payable in pending proceedings, but since the District Court award was made on 9.2.1983, before the Central Amendment Act, 30% solatium was not available. However, because proceedings were still pending on 1.8.1987 when the State Amendment Act came into force, the claimants were entitled to solatium at 15% from 1.8.1987 till payment on the enhanced compensation awarded by the District Court. Interest was payable only from 1.8.1987: 9% per annum for one year from 1.8.1987 on the enhanced market value, and thereafter 15% per annum until payment or deposit. Relying on K.S. Paripoornan v. State of Kerala, additional amount under Section 23(1-A) was not payable because the proceedings were not pending before the Civil Court as on the date of commencement of the Central Amendment Act. The appeal was allowed only to the extent of solatium and interest as stated, and the parties were directed to bear their own costs.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Statutory Interpretation - Inconsistency of State Law with Central Amendment - Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959, Sections 52(2), 53(6)(a), 60-A; Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended by Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 - The appellants challenged Sections 52(2) and 53(6)(a) of the State Act as void for inconsistency with Central Act 68 of 1984 but raised the issue for the first time before the Supreme Court without pursuing it in the High Court; the State Legislature inserted Section 60-A by Amendment Act 29 of 1987 to protect actions taken under the old State Act from being reopened and to apply the Land Acquisition Act prospectively from 1.8.1987 - Held that the constitutional challenge cannot be permitted to be raised for the first time in appeal, and the legislative intention is to apply the Central Act only from the date of commencement of the State Amendment Act, 1987 (Para 3). B) Land Acquisition - Solatium - No Solatium under State Act before Central Amendment - Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959, Sections 52(2), 53(6)(a) - Before the commencement of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act 68 of 1984 on September 24, 1984, the State Act did not provide for solatium for compulsory acquisition, and Section 52(2) only provided simple interest at 6% per annum on compensation determined under Section 53 - Held that prior to the Central Amendment Act, claimants were not entitled to solatium under the State Act (Para 4). C) Land Acquisition - Solatium - Enhanced Solatium in Pending Proceedings - Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (as amended); Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959, Section 60-A - Following Union of India v. Raghubir Singh, enhanced solatium is payable in proceedings pending on the date of commencement of the Amendment Act; however, since the District Court award was made on 9.2.1983, before the Central Amendment Act, 30% solatium was not available, but because proceedings were still pending on 1.8.1987 when the State Amendment Act came into force, claimants are entitled to solatium at 15% from 1.8.1987 till payment on enhanced compensation awarded by the District Court - Held that partial solatium is payable (Para 5). D) Land Acquisition - Interest - Interest on Enhanced Compensation Under Central Amendment - Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (as amended); Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959, Section 60-A - Because the State Amendment Act applied the Land Acquisition Act from 1.8.1987, claimants are entitled to interest under the Central Amendment Act only from that date; interest at 9% per annum on enhanced market value for one year from 1.8.1987, and after expiry of one year till payment or deposit, interest at 15% per annum on enhanced compensation - Held that interest is payable prospectively as per amended provisions (Para 5). E) Land Acquisition - Additional Amount - Section 23(1-A) in Pending Proceedings - Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Section 23(1-A) - Relying on K.S. Paripoornan v. State of Kerala, additional amount under Section 23(1-A) is not available if proceedings were not pending before the Civil Court as on the date of commencement of the Central Amendment Act; since the State Amendment Act made the Central Act applicable only from 1.8.1987 and proceedings were not pending before Civil Court as on 24.9.1984, claimants are not entitled to additional amount - Held that no additional amount is payable (Para 5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether Sections 52(2) and 53(6)(a) of Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959 are void as inconsistent with the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act 68 of 1984; and to what extent landowners are entitled to enhanced solatium, interest, and additional amount under the amended Land Acquisition Act for pending proceedings.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed partly; claimants entitled to solatium at 15% from 1.8.1987 till payment on enhanced compensation, interest at 9% per annum for one year from 1.8.1987 and 15% thereafter till payment/deposit; no additional amount under Section 23(1-A); parties bear own costs.
Law Points
- State amendment validates past actions and applies Land Acquisition Act prospectively from 1.8.1987
- claimants not entitled to solatium before Central Amendment Act 68 of 1984
- solatium at 15% payable from 1.8.1987 on pending proceedings not 30% because award prior to Central Amendment
- interest under Central Act from 1.8.1987 at 9% for one year then 15% till payment
- additional amount under Section 23(1-A) not payable if proceedings not pending before Civil Court on date of Central Amendment
- constitutional challenge to state provisions cannot be raised first time in appeal
