Dismissed

Smt. Godawari Devi Widow of Late Shri Heera Lal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC23 Aug 2024CW/13702/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of an S.B. Civil Writ Petition challenging land acquisition without compensation. The court withdrew the petition with liberty to file a representation seeking developed land as compensation per a 2001 circular, directing authorities to decide within eight weeks.

What the court decided

AI extract

Smt. Godawari Devi Widow of Late Shri Heera Lal Vs State… — Land Acquisition | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JP:35606]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13702/2008

¶4

Smt. Godawari Devi widow of Late Shri Heera (Name deleted)

¶5

Kishan Singh S/o Late Shri Heera Lal, (Since Deceased) Through His Legal Representatives -

¶6

2/1 Smt. Nandu Tank W/o Late Shri Kishan Singh, Aged About 72 Years,

¶7

2/2 Rajendra Singh Tank S/o Late Shri Kishan Singh, Aged About 49 Years,

¶8

2/3 Mahendra Singh Tank S/o Late Shri Kishan Singh, Aged About 47 Years,

¶9

2/4 Vikram Singh Tank S/o Late Shri Kishan Singh, Aged About 43 Years,

¶10

2/5 Smt. Manju Gaur W/o Shri Naresh Gaur D/o Late Shri Kishan Singh, Aged About 50 Years, All R/o Jyoti Nagar, Toparda, Ajmer.

¶11

----Petitioners

¶12

Versus

¶13

State of Rajasthan through Principal Secretary Urban Development and Housing Department, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶14

Ajmer Development Authority, Ajmer Through Its Secretary.

¶15

The District Collector, District Ajmer.

¶16

Land Acquisition Officer, U.I.T., Ajmer.

¶17

Ajmer Municipal Corporation, Ajmer through it’s Chief Executive Officer.

¶18

----Respondents

¶19

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manoj Kumar Bhardwaj For Respondent(s) : Mr. Naman Sirvi for Mr. Ajay Singh for respondents No.2 and 4

¶20

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

¶21

Order

¶22

23/08/2024

¶23

Heard learned counsel for both parties.

[2024:RJ-JP:35606]

[CW-13702/2008]

(2 of 4)

Instant writ petition has been preferred by petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the acquisition of their 1 Bigha 11 Biswa of land of Khasra No.2208 fundamentally on the ground that no compensation in lieu of acquisition of their land has been paid and alternatively, petitioners have made a prayer to allot the developed land as compensation in lieu of acquisition of the land.

¶28

Learned counsel for petitioners contends that the petitioners’ land was acquired by the State Government under the provisions of Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959 to develop a Residential Scheme – Annasagar Circular Road, Ajmer and though the possession of the land of petitioners has been taken, yet no compensation has been awarded. Learned counsel contends that as per circular of the State Government dated 13.12.2001, the petitioners should have been awarded 15% of the developed land in the Scheme itself, in lieu of acquisition of their land and in support, reliance has been placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Lalaram and Ors. Vs. Jaipur Development Authority & Anr.: (2016) 11 SCC 31.

¶29

In counter, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the contesting respondent Nos.2 & 4 pointed out that physical possession of the acquired land including the land of the petitioners was taken on 27.10.1979 and appropriate compensation @ Rs.4,000/- per Bigha for non-irregative land of petitioners was determined. It has been submitted that petitioner No.1 – Smt. Godawari Devi made a request to award 12% developed land in place of monetary compensation, but her request was denied in the year 1998 itself. He also submits that

[2024:RJ-JP:35606]

[CW-13702/2008]

(3 of 4)

since petitioner No.1 did not accept the compensation, her compensation has been deposited before the Civil Judge & ACJM, Ajmer through a cheque on 08.10.2009. Thus, his submission is that the present writ petition deserves to be dismissed and the petitioners are at liberty to withdraw the compensation laying deposited in the Court.

¶34

In rebuttal to the contentions of learned counsel for the respondents, learned counsel for the petitioners states that it was imperative for the Government of Rajasthan to determine and award the compensation in form of the developed land following its Circular dated 13.12.2001, but since neither said Circular has been followed, nor exposition of the law as expounded by the Supreme Court in the case of Lalaram & Ors. (supra) has been followed, therefore, in such circumstances, matter needs to be remanded back to the State Government to reconsider the assessment of proper compensation to the petitioners in form of awarding developed land, instead of monetary compensation against acquisition of their agriculture land.

¶35

Having argued the writ petition at length and after obtaining instructions from the petitioners, learned counsel for the petitioners does not press their prayer for quashing of acquisition proceedings and confine their prayer to award compensation in form of the developed land.

¶36

Further, learned counsel for the petitioners made a request that the present writ petition be allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh representation to the respondent – State Authorities, to reconsider the issue for awarding compensation in lieu of acquisition of their agriculture land, by way of awarding

[2024:RJ-JP:35606]

[CW-13702/2008]

(4 of 4)

developed land instead of monetary compensation more particularly in furtherance to the circular of the State Government dated 13.12.2001 and other prevailing laws.

¶41

In view of above, without expressing any opinion on merits, instant writ petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioners to move a representation before the respondents – State Authorities within a period of four weeks from today. However, it is hereby observed that in case, any such representation is made by petitioners within the aforesaid period, respondents – State Authorities shall consider and decide the same within a period of eight weeks from receipt thereof in accordance with law, considering the applicability of Circular dated 13.12.2001, to such acquisition proceeding.

¶42

Any other pending application, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶43

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

¶44

TN/38

Smt. Godawari Devi Widow of Late Shri Heera Lal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Smt. Godawari Devi Widow of Late Shri Heera Lal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Jyoti Khanwani W/O Ishwar Khanwani, Vs Rajesh Khanwani Son of Pappu Nevraj

Ramesh Chand @ Ramesh Prakash Vs Smt Ram Kanwari and Ors.

Deepak Soni Son of Devraj Soni Vs Devraj Soni Son of Late Shri Bhanwarlal Soni

Maqsood Khan Vs State and Ors.

Jagdish Singh S/O Shri Jawahar Lal Alias Johri Lal Alia Jawahari Lal Choudhary Vs Smt. Kalawati Devi W/O Late Sh. Rajendra Singh

M/S R.S. Bajaj Tea Company Vs Rajasthan State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd.