Tila Mahto Alias Tilakdhari Singh Vs State of Jharkhand through the Deputy Commissioner

2025:JHHC:19362

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

F.A. No. 298 of 2023

Tila Mahto @ Tilakdhari Singh, S/o Late Nathu Mahto, aged about 74 years, resident of Village- Sonpurwa, P.O.- Nawajaipur, P.S.- Paton (Patan), District- Palamau, Jharkhand

¶5

… … Petitioner/Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Jharkhand through the Deputy Commissioner, Palamau, P.O. + P.S. & District- Palamau … … Respondent

¶8

¶9

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --For the Appellant : Mr. Ravi Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Om Prakash Tiwari, G.P.-III : Mr. Varun Prabhakar, AC to G.P.-III ---

¶10

16 /16.07.2025

¶11

Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties.

¶12

2. This First Appeal has been filed under section 74 of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 2013’) against the judgment and award dated 13.02.2023 and 23.02.2023 respectively passed by learned Principal District Judge-cum- L.A.R.R.A., Palamau at Daltonganj in Land Acquisition Case No. 26 of 2022 arising out of Land Acquisition Record No. 16 of 2019-20 (award no. 2).

¶13

Arguments on behalf of the appellant

¶14

3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has submitted that the appellant is only aggrieved by the rate as applied by impugned judgment for award of compensation with respect to the land acquired in this case. He has submitted that total area of 2.82 acres of land of village Sonpurwa, P.S. Paton, District- Palamau was acquired and the Special Land Acquisition Officer had fixed the compensation @ Rs. 5191/- per decimal. Since the appellant was not satisfied with the grant of compensation, the matter was referred to the learned Cout under section 64 of the Act of 2013. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant had claimed compensation @

¶15

2025:JHHC:19362

¶16

Rs. 50,000/- per decimal and apart from that, it was claimed that the appellant would be entitled to solatium and interest.

¶17

4. The learned counsel has submitted that altogether six sale-deeds were exhibited from the side of the appellant before the learned court which were marked as exhibit- 1 to exhibit- 1/5 and all the sale-deeds were relating to the adjoining village i.e., Mouza Nawa Khas. He has also submitted that the sale-deeds were ranging from date 01.12.2017 till 30.07.2018 and the land in the present case was acquired by issuance of notification on 01.08.2019 and the declaration was published on 25.02.2020.

¶18

5. Learned counsel for the appellant has also submitted that the rate chart which was exhibited on behalf of the respondent before the learned court was contained in exhibit-C and in the said rate chart, there was reference of altogether 13 sale-deeds ranging from the year 2016 to 2018 which included all the sale-deeds exhibited by the applicant. The learned counsel has submitted that the learned court has referred to the sale-deeds exhibited by the appellant and has mentioned the circle rate while discussing the sale-deed instead of the market value of the property which was referrable to the sale-deed itself.

¶19

6. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the learned court was of the view that average rate of the land in the locality should be taken into consideration for determination of compensation and has abruptly come to an amount of Rs. 9257/- per decimal. The learned counsel has further submitted that ultimately the learned court has taken the rate as Rs. 9250/- per decimal, but there is no explanation as to why even Rs. 9257/- was not taken and instead rate as Rs. 9250/- per decimal was taken. He submits that the learned court has neither given the mode and manner of calculation for arriving at average rate of Rs. 9257/- per decimal nor there is any explanation as to why the rate was taken as Rs. 9250/- per decimal instead of Rs. 9257/-. He has further submitted that if all the 13 saledeeds are taken into consideration, then average comes to Rs. 13,379/and if only the sale-deeds considering the higher area is taken into

¶20

2

¶21

2025:JHHC:19362

¶22

consideration, then the average comes to Rs. 4831.16. The learned counsel submits that in spite of best of his efforts he is unable to find out as to which all sale-deeds have been taken into consideration for arriving at the average of Rs. 9257/-.

¶23

7. However, during the course of arguments the learned counsel for the appellant has referred to the provisions of section 26 of the aforesaid Act of 2013 and has in particular referred to explanation (1) and (2) thereof to submit that amongst the total number of sale-deeds i.e., 13, if half is taken into consideration, then it would come to 6. If 6 sale-deeds are taken into consideration, under such circumstances, the average would come to Rs. 21,421/-. He has calculated the aforesaid amount by taking into consideration the sale-deeds at serial nos. 7, 8, 10, 11, 12 and 13 in the chart produced by him which is as under:

¶24

SL. No.	Sale Deed No.	Date of Sale deed	Area in Decimal	Sale deed value	Rate Per Decimal	Ext. if exhi in case	No. bited the	Circle Rate Per Decimal
1.	1291	18/3/2016	30	125000	4166/-
2.	2819	5/7/2016	39.75	220000	5534/-
3.	4034	2/9/2016	113.25	467500	4128/-
4.	4153	10/9/2016	12	50000	4166/-
5.	2373	6/6/2017	75	325000	4333/-
6.	2374	6/6/2017	75	325000	4333/-
7	4990	12/1/2017	5.5	150000	27272/-	Ext.	1	15000/-
8.	5147	12/11/2017	8	150000	18750/-
9.	1573	19/3/2018	19	100000	5263/-	Ext.	1/1	4332/-
10.	1578	19/3/2018	7.5	112500	15000/-	Ext.	1/2	15000/-
11.	2129	19/4/2018	4	170000	42500/-	Ext.	1/3	15000/-
12.	2156	21/4/2018	12.5	400000	32000/-	Ext.	1/4	15000/-
13.	4285	30/7/2018	38.5	250000	6493/-	Ext.	1/5	4332/-

¶25

8. The learned counsel has submitted that the average market value be taken as Rs. 21,421/- per decimal and the awarded amount be enhanced.

¶26

9. With respect to other components mentioned in the award, the learned counsel has submitted that so far as heads of the other components are concerned, he has got no grievance, but if the rate is

¶27

3

¶28

2025:JHHC:19362

¶29

changed, then under such circumstances, the calculation would automatically change.

¶30

Arguments on behalf of the Respondent

¶31

10. Learned counsel for the respondent, while opposing the prayer, has also tried his best to find out as to how the learned court has come to average of Rs. 9257/- per decimal, but he is also unable to find out by making various permutation and combination of the 13 sale-deeds mentioned in the chart (exhibit-C). However, he has submitted that large chunk of land was acquired which was to the extent of 2.82 acres and therefore, the smaller chunk of land need not be taken into consideration. However, he has further submitted that if the sale-deeds are considered by referring to the area involved in the sale-deeds, then the compensation would come to Rs. 4831.16 which would be even less than the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer.

¶32

11. Learned counsel for the respondent has further submitted that since there were altogether 13 sale-deeds and if half of the sale-deeds are taken into consideration, then at least 7 sale-deeds should be taken into consideration and those sale-deeds would be from serial nos. 8 to 13 and 5 or 6 as they are one and the same and out of sl. No. 5 and 6, one can be taken into consideration as the rate is same.

¶33

12. Learned counsel for the respondent has further submitted that if the sale-deeds from sl. Nos. 7 to 13 are taken into consideration, the compensation amount would come to Rs. 21,039 per decimal.

¶34

Rejoinder argument of the appellant

¶35

13. In response, the learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the acquired land was in the vicinity of national highway and considering this aspect of the matter, the average of the 6 sale-deeds should be taken into consideration or at best, average of the 7 saledeeds should be taken into consideration.

¶36

Findings of this Court

¶37

14. The present case arises out of Land Acquisition Record No. 16 of 2019-20 (award no. 2). The land pertaining to Mouza- Sonpurwa, Plot No. 79, area 2.82 acres was acquired under the provisions of the

¶38

4

¶39

2025:JHHC:19362

¶40

aforesaid Act of 2013 for the project namely, Auranga Right Main Canal in the District of Palamau. Notification with regard to acquisition of land was published on 01.08.2019 and the declaration was published on 25.02.2020. Against the said acquisition, the Collector awarded compensation @ Rs. 5191/- per decimal. The appellant, being dissatisfied with the amount awarded, preferred a reference petition under section 64 of the Act of 2013. Said reference was sent to the Court by the Special Land Acquisition Officer to decide the reference by giving details of acquired area, date of payment and rate of compensation.

¶41

15. Before the learned trial court, the applicant assailed the impugned Award of Special Land Acquisition Officer and submitted that Special Land Acquisition Officer did not correctly assess the actual market value of the land and it is at a very low rate without appreciating the applicant’s land. It was further submitted that the Special Land Acquisition Officer did not appreciate the potentiality of the land as the land which was acquired is in fact a developed land and pucca road and National Highway crosses from there, which rises the potentiality of the land. It was further submitted that the Special Land Acquisition Officer, by ignoring the aforesaid facts of the land, awarded compensation to the applicant @ Rs.5191/- per decimal, i.e very low and minimum. It was also the case of the applicant in the reference petition that he is entitled to get compensation of the land acquired @ Rs.50,000/- per decimal. Apart from that he also claimed solatium and interest.

¶42

16. The respondent filed their written statement thereby denying the contention made in the reference petition with respect to the rate mentioned by the applicant and according to them, rate was determined after perusal of the entire sale deed of the locality, seeing the nature of the land and the same is adequate and justified.

¶43

17. Considering the pleadings of the parties, the learned trial court framed following issue for consideration:

¶44

Whether the compensation amount of the petitioner should be

enhanced?

5

2025:JHHC:19362

18. Altogether 3 witnesses were adduced on behalf of the applicant. P.W.1 Pradeep Kumar, P.W.2 Laxuman Yadav @ Laxuman Mahto and P.W.3 Om Prakash Singh. Apart from the above witnesses, some documentary evidences were also adduced which were marked as exhibits as under:-

¶49

“I. Ext.1-C.C. of Sale Deed NO.4990 dated 01-12-2017.

¶50

II. Ext.1/1-C.C. of sale deed no.1573 dated 19-03-2018 III. Ext.1/2-C.C. of sale deed no.1578 dated 19-03-2018 IV. Ext. 1/3-C.C. of sale deed No.2129 dated 19-04-2018 V. Ext.1/4-C.C. of sale deed No.2156 dated 21-04-2018

¶51

VI. Ext.1/5- C.C. of sale deed No.4285 dated 30-07-2018”

¶52

19. The respondent examined only one witness namely, Mohan Mahto being the I/c Kanoongo of Special Land Acquisition Office, North Koel Project. On behalf of the respondent following documents were brought that were exhibited:

¶53

“I. Ext. A- xerox copy of order sheet in 07 sheets.

¶54

II. Ext. B-Xerox copy of estimate in 02 sheets.

¶55

III. Ext.C-xerox copy of sale chart in 05 sheets

¶56

IV. Ext.D-xerox copy of valuation Khatiyan in 04 sheets.

¶57

V. Ext.E-xerox copy of collector Award 04 sheets.”

¶58

20. After considering the materials on record, the learned trial court enhanced the rate of compensation to Rs. 9250/- per decimal and held as under:

¶59

“11- In the light of settled principle of law, I took notice of the sale deed filed by the petitioners and also considered the sale chart filed by the State (agricultural land and residential land) and considering the all facts and taking into consideration the statutory provisions as well as settled law I came to this conclusion that the average rate of the land in the said locality for determination of the compensation should be Rs.9257/per decimal. For better calculation I am of the view that Petitioners have succeeded to establish that in fact the rate of the land considering the market value of the land was Rs.9250/- per decimal in stead of Rs.5191/-per decimal as determined by the Land Acquisition Officer.

¶60

6

¶61

2025:JHHC:19362

¶62

Accordingly, It is here by

¶63

AWARDED

¶64

That the petitioner is entitled for compensation @ Rs.9250/- per decimal, consequently amount of Rs.5191/per decimal stands enhanced. Beside this the petitioner is also entitled to get all statutory benefits provided under the provisions of L.A.R.R. Act, 2013…”

¶65

21. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the only dispute involved in this case is with respect to the rate at which the compensation is to be paid in connection with 2.82 acres of acquired land in village Sonpurwa, P.S. Paton, District- Palamau.

¶66

22. This Court finds that P.W. 1 - Pradeep Kumar is an applicant in one of the L.A. Case Nos. 26 of 2022 to 28 of 2022. He in his examination-in-chief filed on affidavit has stated that the acquired land is residential in nature and suitable for constructing house or shop and they used to get usufructs from the land annually and were the source of income for the whole year. He further stated that the land is situated in Sonpurwa Bazar area which is a business centre and houses and shops have also been constructed adjacent to the land and therefore, the acquired land of the applicant is of commercial and residential nature. He has further stated that the acquired land is adjacent to Paton, Nawa and Tarhasi which are well developed commercial area. National highway also passes adjacent to the acquired land and there is network of metaled road all around the area. This witness further stated that Patan block and circle office are situated near the acquired land and bank, high school, college, police station, hospital, post office, developed market, electricity sub-station and small-scale industries are also situated near the acquired land. There is proper supply of electricity for the small-scale industries and due to industrialization of the area, nature of the acquired land has become residential and its value has increased considerably. During cross-examination, P.W. 1 admitted that there was no house over his

¶67

7

¶68

2025:JHHC:19362

¶69

land but it was a residential area. He further admitted that his acquired land was similar to the acquired lands of other two persons.

¶70

23. This Court further finds that P.W. 2 – Laxuman Yadav @ Laxuman Mahto is also an applicant in one of the L.A. Case Nos. 26 of 2022 to 28 of 2022. This witness has also stated the same facts as stated by P.W. 1 in connection with the acquired lands. In his crossexamination, he admitted that his land was residential in nature, but he has also stated the other facts in the same way as stated by P.W. 1.

¶71

24. This Court further finds that P.W. 3 – Om Prakash Singh has fully supported the facts stated by P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 in connection with the acquired lands. He has also stated that all the acquired lands are residential in nature and suitable for constructing a house or shop. In his cross-examination also, he has supported the case of the applicants.

¶72

25. This Court also finds that only one witness namely, Mohan Mahto has been examined on behalf of the opposite party. He filed his examination-in-chief on affidavit stating that he is working on the post of Kanoongo in the Special Land Acquisition office, North Koyal Project, Medininagar, Daltonganj and he knows the facts of the acquired land on the basis of the records of the office. He further stated that the compensation amount of Rs. 5191/- per decimal has been paid to the land owners by the concerned officers complying all the due procedure of land acquisition and the rate of compensation determined against the acquired land by the concerned officers is just and fair and claim of the applicants for enhancement of compensation is baseless. During cross-examination, he admitted that Sonpurwa village is situated adjacent to the Nawa Khas village and the rate of compensation determined for the acquired lands is based on sale-deeds having lesser value of sale. He has further admitted that the acquired lands were suitable for constructing residential house.

¶73

26. Admittedly, the rate chart which was submitted by the respondents (exhibit-C) referred to altogether 13 sale-deeds and the appellant had exhibited altogether six sale-deeds before the court and the 6 sale-deeds exhibited by the appellant were also included in the

¶74

8

¶75

2025:JHHC:19362

¶76

13 sale-deeds mentioned in the rate chart. The compensation as fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer was Rs. 5191/- per decimal and the learned trial court after considering the materials on record, was of the view that average with respect to the sale-deeds was required to be considered. However, the learned trial court, while coming to the conclusion that the average would come to Rs. 9257/- has not recorded in the impugned judgment as to how the Court has come to such a figure and the learned counsel for the parties are also not able to arrive at such figure in spite of calculations made by them under different permutation and combination of the various sale-deeds which were exhibited in exhibit-C and exhibit- 1 to 1/5 before the learned court.

¶77

27. However, the learned counsels have submitted that the rate of compensation can be considered by this Court in the light of the provisions of section 26 of the aforesaid Act of 2013. The sale-deeds which have been placed are ranging from 18.03.2016 to 30.07.2018 and in the light of the provision of section 26 (explanation 1 and 2), one-half of the sale-deeds having the higher price are required to be taken into account. Consequently, amongst the chart the sale-deeds contained at serial nos. 7 to 13 are required to be taken into consideration and upon calculation, the average rate per decimal comes to Rs. 21,039/-.

¶78

28. Learned counsel for the parties have jointly submitted that so far as the awarded amount is concerned, the same has already been paid to the appellant on 12.10.2023.

¶79

29. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court finds that sale-deeds contained at serial nos. 7 to 13 of the aforesaid chart are required to be taken into consideration for calculation of average rate of compensation for the acquired land. Accordingly, the average rate would come to Rs. 21,039/- [27,272/- + 18,750/- + 5,263/- + 15,000/- + 42,500/- + 32,000/- + 6,493/- divided by 7]. The compensation is accordingly enhanced to Rs. Rs. 21,039/- per decimal. The appellant would be entitled to the other statutory benefits under different heads as awarded.

¶80

9

¶81

2025:JHHC:19362

¶82

30. Office to prepare decree accordingly.

¶83

31. This 1^st Appeal is disposed of.

¶84

32. Pending interlocutory application, if any, is closed.

¶85

33. Let this order be communicated to the learned Court concerned through ‘FAX/email’.