Allahabad High Court Directs Payment at Apex Court Rate but Refuses 1984 Enhancement Benefits

A single-judge bench of Justice Sandeep Jain heard the first appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, challenging the award of compensation for land acquired by NOIDA in 1976–77 and also considered applications for delay condonation and substitution to bring legal heirs on record.

The court allowed the appeal and held that compensation must be fixed at the same rate as determined by the Supreme Court in Ajai Pal Singh & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh, namely Rs.28.12 paise per square yard, but declined to apply the enhanced solatium and higher interest introduced by the Amending Act, 1984, because the Collector’s award and the Reference Court’s decision pre-dated 30.04.1982. The Court, in its reasoning, observed: “It is apparent that in this case the award of the Collector and the Reference Court has been made prior to 30.04.1982, as such, in view of the above law laid down by the Apex Court, the appellants are not entitled to get enhanced solatium @ 30% in accordance with the Amending Act 68 of 1984. The appellants are only entitled to get solatium @ 15% for their acquired land. Similarly, the appellants will only be entitled to get interest @ 6% per annum on the enhanced amount of compensation awarded to them, by this Court.” The court also noted that the appellants were not entitled to interest on the enhanced amount for the period during which the appeal remained defective.

Background

The appeal arose from an award dated 02.05.1977 by the Collector in respect of land in village Morna, Pargana and Tehsil Dadri (now Gautam Buddh Nagar), where compensation had been fixed at Rs.10,225 per bigha for chai land and Rs.7,570 per bigha for khaki land; the Reference Court thereafter converted the award to Rs.6 per square yard and granted solatium at 15% and interest at 6% per annum. The appellants sought enhancement of compensation by invoking the Supreme Court’s decision in Ajai Pal Singh (decided 23.09.2021), which awarded compensation at Rs.28.12 paise per square yard for NOIDA acquisitions of 1976–77. The respondent (NOIDA) conceded the applicability of Ajai Pal Singh for determining the per-square-yard rate but urged that enhancements under the 1984 Amendment should not apply.

The High Court recorded uncontroverted affidavits filed in support of delay condonation and substitution applications after several original appellants died during the pendency of the appeal and their advocates also passed away; the court found the cause shown sufficient, condoned the delay and allowed substitution, directing amendment of the memo of appeal. Applying settled precedents — including Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti v. Kanhaiya Lal, Ghaziabad Development Authority v. Anoop Singh and Sarup Singh v. Union of India — the court held that where the Collector’s award and Reference Court order were passed prior to 30.04.1982, the benefits of Sections 23(1-A), 23(2) and the amended Section 34 introduced by the 1984 Act could not be made applicable. The court therefore allowed the appeal insofar as the rate per square yard was enhanced to Rs.28.12 paise, confirmed solatium at 15% and interest at 6% p.a., disallowed interest for the period the appeal remained defective (02.12.1982 to 11.01.1985), and made no order as to costs. The office was directed to prepare the decree accordingly.

Case Details: Case No.: First Appeal No. - 681 of 2002 Case Title: Sri Kishan And Others Versus State of U.P. Appearances: For the Petitioner(s): Hemant Kumar; Shiv Shankar Singh For the Respondent(s): A. K. Roy