Supreme Court Enhances Compensation in NOIDA Land Acquisition Case
The case of Ajai Pal Singh & Ors. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. and Smt. Barfi Devi (Dead) through L.R.s & Ors. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. revolves around a long-standing land acquisition dispute concerning compensation for agricultural land acquired by the New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA) for planned industrial development.
Background of the Case
The dispute began when the State of Uttar Pradesh issued a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act on 30.04.1976 for acquiring approximately 589 bigha, 6 biswa, and 14 biswansi of land for NOIDA. A declaration under Section 6 was published on 01.05.1976, and possession was taken by the Collector on 31.07.1977.
The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) initially awarded compensation at Rs. 10,200 per bigha (approximately Rs. 2.38 per square yard). Dissatisfied with the compensation, the landowners sought enhancement through a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The Reference Court increased the compensation to Rs. 14,000 per bigha (approximately Rs. 4.628 per square yard).
Still dissatisfied, the landowners appealed to the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, seeking further enhancement. However, the High Court dismissed the appeals, confirming the compensation granted by the Reference Court.
Appeals Before the Supreme Court
The appellants (original landowners) filed appeals before the Supreme Court, arguing for a significant increase in compensation based on previous judgments in similar cases.
Arguments by the Landowners
The appellants contended that:
- The compensation should be increased to Rs. 297 per square yard, relying on the judgment in Mangu & Ors. vs. State of U.P., where compensation for land acquired in 1991 was enhanced to this rate.
- The land in the present case was acquired in 1976, which is before the 1991 acquisition in Mangu’s case, and the same principle of parity should apply.
- Village Baraula (where the land in the present case was acquired) and Village Kakrala Khaspur (in Mangu’s case) are geographically adjacent and should be treated equally.
- In Khazan & Ors. vs. State of U.P., where land was acquired in 1983, the compensation was enhanced to Rs. 297 per square yard. The same rate should be applied to the present case after applying a 10% per year depreciation adjustment for seven years.
- The appellants had been waiting for over 45 years for fair compensation, and the delay had caused significant financial hardship.
Arguments by NOIDA
The counsel for NOIDA strongly opposed the enhancement, stating:
- The judgment in Mangu’s case is not comparable because the land there was acquired in 1991, whereas in the present case, the land was acquired in 1976.
- The High Court, while deciding Mangu’s case, inadvertently tagged along appeals related to acquisitions from 1977 and granted Rs. 297 per square yard by mistake.
- NOIDA had filed review petitions before the High Court to correct this error, and those petitions were pending.
- Multiple High Court decisions had consistently fixed compensation for lands acquired in 1976-1977 at Rs. 28.12 per square yard, and the same should apply here.
- The Supreme Court had already confirmed this compensation rate in previous judgments.
Supreme Court’s Key Observations
1. Parity with Mangu’s Case Not Applicable
The Supreme Court rejected the appellants’ argument that their compensation should match the Mangu case, stating:
“The acquisition in Mangu’s case was in 1991, whereas in the present case, the land was acquired in 1976. The 15-year difference in acquisition dates makes them non-comparable.”
2. Mistake in High Court’s Earlier Judgment
The Court acknowledged that the High Court had mistakenly applied Rs. 297 per square yard to 1977 acquisitions due to a clerical oversight. It stated:
“No one can be allowed to benefit from a mistake of the court, especially when NOIDA has already filed review petitions to correct the error.”
3. Consistency in Compensation for 1976-1977 Acquisitions
The Supreme Court reviewed multiple High Court decisions and found that compensation for lands acquired in 1976-1977 had consistently been fixed at Rs. 28.12 per square yard. It cited previous cases, including:
- Madan Lal Sharma vs. State of U.P. (08.09.2009)
- Bhola vs. State of U.P. (04.11.2016)
- Gyan Chand vs. State of U.P. (14.12.2016)
- Daal Chand vs. State of U.P. (03.11.2016)
- Jagdish Chand vs. State of U.P. (21.12.2016)
Since the Supreme Court had upheld these compensation rates in earlier cases, it concluded that the same should apply here.
Final Judgment
The Supreme Court ruled:
- The appellants are entitled to compensation at Rs. 28.12 per square yard, consistent with previous rulings.
- The High Court’s decision is modified to reflect this enhanced compensation.
- The landowners are entitled to all statutory benefits, including interest and solatium, on the enhanced compensation.
Implications of the Judgment
This ruling has significant implications for land acquisition cases:
1. Ensuring Consistency in Compensation
The Supreme Court’s ruling establishes a precedent that compensation for similar acquisitions must be determined consistently across cases.
2. Preventing Errors from Affecting Future Claims
The Court’s recognition of the High Court’s clerical error ensures that mistaken judgments do not become the basis for unjustified claims.
3. Fair Compensation for Landowners
While the landowners did not receive the Rs. 297 per square yard they sought, the judgment provides a legally sound compensation figure based on established precedents.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s decision in Ajai Pal Singh & Ors. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and related appeals reinforces the principle of fair and consistent compensation in land acquisition matters. By setting compensation at Rs. 28.12 per square yard, the Court balanced the rights of landowners while maintaining legal consistency in valuation methodology.
Petitioner Name: Ajai Pal Singh & Ors., Smt. Barfi Devi (Dead) through L.R.s & Ors..Respondent Name: State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr..Judgment By: Justice M. R. Shah, Justice A. S. Bopanna.Place Of Incident: NOIDA, Uttar Pradesh.Judgment Date: 23-09-2021.
Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!
Download Judgment: ajai-pal-singh-&-ors-vs-state-of-uttar-prade-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-23-09-2021.pdf
Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment
See all petitions in Property Disputes
See all petitions in Landlord-Tenant Disputes
See all petitions in Damages and Compensation
See all petitions in Contract Disputes
See all petitions in Judgment by Mukeshkumar Rasikbhai Shah
See all petitions in Judgment by A. S. Bopanna
See all petitions in partially allowed
See all petitions in Modified
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments September 2021
See all petitions in 2021 judgments
See all posts in Civil Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Civil Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Civil Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Civil Cases Category
