Supreme Court of India
UNION OF INDIA & ANR.versusPUSHPAVATHI & ORS. ETC.
- Citation
- 2018 INSC 103
- Decided
- 6 February 2018
- Disposal
- Dismissed
- Bench
- R K AGRAWAL
Holding
A dispute concerning the non‑award of interest under Sections 28 or 34 is not within the scope of Section 18 or 28A(3) and must be challenged by a writ petition under Article 226, not by reference to the civil court.
Summary
The Union of India acquired land in Pondicherry for a university and determined compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Some landowners, dissatisfied with the compensation, obtained a higher award from a civil court under Section 18, after which the Collector re‑determined compensation but refused to pay statutory interest under Sections 28 and 34. The landowners challenged the Collector's refusal by filing writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, while the Union argued that the proper remedy was a reference to the civil court under Section 28A(3) read with Section 18. The Supreme Court held that non‑payment of interest is not a dispute covered by Section 18 or 28A(3) and therefore cannot be referred to the civil court; the only remedy is a writ petition under Article 226. Relying on the decisions in Shree Vijay Cotton & Oil Mills Ltd. and Delhi Development Authority v. Mahender Singh, the Court affirmed that interest is a statutory right not subject to procedural referral. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed and the High Court’s order granting interest was upheld.
Issues considered
- Whether a landowner aggrieved by the Collector's refusal to award interest under Sections 28 or 34 can seek redress by a reference to the civil court under Section 28A(3) read with Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
- Whether the appropriate remedy for non‑award of interest is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Legislation cited
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894s. 11, s. 18, s. 23, s. 26, s. 28, s. 28A, s. 34
Subjects
Land acquisitionInterest on compensationSection 18Section 28Section 34Writ petitionArticle 226Statutory remedyCivil court reference
Judgment
434 [2018]REPORTS
SUPREME COURT 10 S.C.R. 434 [2018] 10 S.C.R.
A UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
v.
PUSHPAVATHI & ORS. ETC.
(Civil Appeal Nos.1622-1631 of 2018)
B FEBRUARY 06, 2018
[R. K. AGRAWAL AND ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, JJ.]
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – ss. 18, 28 and 34 – Collector
declining to award interest on compensation u/s. 28A proceedings
to the landowners – Legal remedy available to the landowners
C
against such order – Landowner should approach the Civil Court
in reference u/s.28A(3) r/w. s.18 of the Act or should file writ petition
u/s.226 of the Constitution – Held: A dispute relating to non-award
of interest payable to the landowners u/s.28 and s.34 of the Act is
not specified u/s. 18 and hence it is not capable of being referred
D by the Collector to the Civil Court u/s. 18 of the Act – It is also for
the reason that payment of interest is statutory in character and
being statutory, it is mandatory for payment once conditions
specified u/s.28 or/and 34 are fulfilled – In Shree Vijay Cotton &
Oils Mills case it was held that there is inherent evidence in the
wording of ss. 28 and 34 to show that the framers of the Act intended
E
to assure the payment of interest to the person whose land was
acquired and it was not the intention to subject the said payment to
procedural hazards – Accordingly, the dispute in relation to non-
award of interest can be raised by an aggrieved person only by
taking recourse to Art. 226 of the Constitution in writ petition –
F Reference u/s.18 or s.28A(3) cannot be considered to be an
alternative statutory remedy available to the landowner for getting
the question of non-award of interest payable u/s.28 or/and 34 of
the Act decided by the Civil Court – Constitution of India – Art.
226.
G Dismissing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1. The dispute relating to non-award of the interest
to the landowners, whether under Section 28 or Section 34 is not
a dispute, which falls under Section 18 or/and 28A(3) of the Act.
In other words, a reference under Section 18 can only be made
H
434
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. v. PUSHPAVATHI & ORS. ETC. 435
by the Collector in respect of those issues, which are specified A
under Section 18. [Para 36] [447-G-H]
2. A dispute relating to non-award of interest payable to
the landowners under Section 28 or/and Section 34 of the Act is
not specified under Section 18 and hence it is not capable of being
referred by the Collector to the Civil Court under Section 18 of B
the Act. It is also for the reason that payment of interest is
statutory in character and being statutory, it is mandatory for
payment once conditions specified under Sections 28 or/and 34
are fulfilled. [Para 37] [448-A-B]
3. It is true that once the interest is awarded by the Court C
under section 28 or by the Collector under Section 34 of the Act,
it becomes the part of the award. However, it is hardly of any
significance and has no bearing for deciding the question of
remedy to challenge issue relating to the non-award of interest.
[Para 38] [448-C]
D
4. Such issue is required to be decided keeping in view the
wording of Section 18 of the Act, which specifies the issues on
which the reference can be made to the Court and non-award of
interest is not the issue specified in Section 18 of the Act. In this
view of the matter, no reference can be made to the Court to
decide the issue of non-award of interest under Section 18 of the E
Act. [Para 39] [448-D]
5. This Court explained the object and scope of Sections
28 and 34 succinctly in the case of *Shree Vijay Cotton & Oil Mills
Ltd. in the following words: “There is inherent evidence in the
wording of ss.28 and 34 to show that the framers of the Act intended F
to assure the payment of interest to the person whose land was
acquired and it was not the intention to subject the said payment to
procedural hazards...” [Para 41] [448-F-G]
6. Accordingly, the dispute in relation to non-award of
interest can be raised by an aggrieved person only by taking G
recourse to Article 226 of the Constitution in writ petition. In
other words, reference under Section 18 or Section 28A(3) cannot
be considered to be an alternative statutory remedy available to
the landowner for getting the question of non-award of interest
H
436 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2018] 10 S.C.R.
A payable under Sections 28 or/and 34 of the Act decided by the
Civil Court. [Para 42] [449-D]
*Shree Vijay Cotton & Oil Mills Ltd. v. State of Gujarat
(1991) 1 SCC 262 : [1990] 3 Suppl. SCR 447; Delhi
Development Authority v. Mahender Singh & Anr.
B (2009) 5 SCC 339 : [2009] 4 SCR 788 – relied on.
Case Law Reference
[1990] 3 Suppl. SCR 447 relied on Para 41
[2009] 4 SCR 788 relied on Para 43
C CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 1622-
1631 of 2018
From the Judgment and Order dated 08.07.2009 of the High Court
of Judicature at Madras, in W. A. No. 1384 to 1392 and 1755 of 1999
WITH
D
C. A. Nos. 1632-1641 and 1642-1643 of 2018.
R. Venkataramani, Sr. Adv., V. G. Pragasam, Prabu
Ramasubramanian, S. Manuraj, Yashraj Singh Bundela, Praveen Vignesh,
Advs. for the Appellants.
E G. Sivabalamurugan, Vasantha Kumar, L. K. Pandey, P. Jegan,
P. Parmeswaran, Advs. for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, J. 1. Leave granted.
F 2. These appeals arise from the final judgment and order dated
08.07.2009 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in W.A.
Nos. 1384 to 1392 and 1755 of 1999 whereby the Division Bench of the
High Court dismissed the writ appeals filed by the appellants herein and
affirmed the order dated 13.04.1999 passed by the Single Judge of the
High Court in W.P. Nos.5486-5494 of 1999 and order dated 13.07.1999
G
in W.P. No.11806 of 1999.
3. The issue involved in these appeals is short and in order to
appreciate the same, few relevant facts need mention hereinbelow.
4. The first appellant is the Union of India through Secretary,
H Revenue Department, Pondicherry and the second appellant is the
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. v. PUSHPAVATHI & ORS. ETC. 437
[ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, J.]
Revenue Officer-cum-Land Acquisition Officer. The appellants herein A
were respondents whereas the respondents herein, who are the
landowners, were writ petitioners in the writ petitions before the High
Court.
5. In exercise of the powers conferred under Section 4 of the
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), the B
Government of Pondicherry on 22.12.1986 issued a Notification seeking
to acquire land bearing Survey No.2 Pt. of an extent of 3 Hec. 83 Ares
50 Cen situated in village Pillaichavadi, Pondicherry for public purpose,
namely, establishment of Central University (Phase-V). This was
followed by a declaration issued under Section 6 of the Act on 12.03.1987.
The acquired land included the lands belonging to the respondents herein. C
6. The Land Acquisition Officer (LAO) passed an Award (No.2/
1987) under Section 11 of the Act on 01.06.1987 and determined the
compensation for the land acquired at the rate of Rs.318/- per Are.
7. One landowner–Govindammal, whose land was also acquired D
under the same notification, dissatisfied with the rate of compensation
awarded by the LAO, sought reference under Section 18 of the Act to
the Civil Court for re-determination of the rate of compensation for his
acquired land. The Reference Court, by its award dated 09.05.1989 in
reference case No. L.A.O.P. No.337/88 enhanced the rate of
compensation of the acquired land from Rs.318/- per are to Rs.1000/- E
per Kuzhi (Rs. 1868/- per Are).
8. The respondents (landowners) having come to know of the
passing of the award by the Reference Court enhancing the compensation
referred above filed applications under Section 28A of the Act to the
Collector (LAO) on 08.08.1991 for re- determination of compensation F
payable to them for their acquired land in the aforementioned acquisition
proceedings.
9. Though the Collector made an enquiry, as contemplated under
Section 28A of the Act, on the applications made by the respondents but
no final orders were passed. The respondents, therefore, filed writ G
petitions (W.P No. 10649 of 1996 etc.) in the High Court at Madras.
10. The High Court, by order dated 19.08.1998 allowed the writ
petitions in part and directed the Collector to dispose of the applications
filed by the respondents under Section 28A of the Act. The Collector
H
438 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2018] 10 S.C.R.
A accordingly disposed of the applications by passing orders on different
dates between 15.11.1994 and 22.11.1994 and re-determined the
compensation payable to the respondents.
11. The respondents, having noticed that the Collector though re-
determined the compensation but had failed to award interest on
B compensation under Section 28 or Section 34 of the Act, felt aggrieved
of the orders of the Collector and filed a representation to the Collector
praying therein for award of interest on the compensation. By order
dated 14.12.1998, the Collector rejected the respondents’ representation.
12. Felt aggrieved, the respondents filed writ petitions in the High
C Court and challenged therein the legality and correctness of the order
dated 14.12.1998 of the Collector declining to award interest on the
compensation determined by him under Section 28-A proceedings.
13. The appellants herein, who were the respondents in the said
writ petitions, raised a preliminary objection about the maintainability of
D the writ petitions filed by the respondents. Their main contention was
that the remedy of the respondents herein in such case lies in applying
for making a reference to the Civil Court as provided under Section 28A
(3) read with Section 18 of the Act. It was contended that if the
respondents (landowners) were aggrieved by the order of the Collector,
which declined to award the interest on the compensation, their
E appropriate remedy was to seek a reference to the Civil Court as provided
under Section 28A(3) of the Act, it being a statutory remedy available to
them under the Act but not in filing the writ petitions under Article 226 of
the Constitution.
14. The Single Judge by order dated 13.04.1999, overruled the
F preliminary objection, allowed the writ petitions on merits and awarded
the interest as claimed by the respondents. The Union of India, being
aggrieved by the order of the Single Judge, filed intra court appeals
before the Division Bench. By impugned judgment, the Division Bench
dismissed the writ appeals and affirmed the order of the Single Judge
G (Writ Court). It is against this judgment, the Union of India has filed
these appeals by way of special leave before this Court.
15. Heard Mr. R. Venkataramani, learned senior counsel for the
appellants and Mr. G. Sivabalamurugan and Mr. P. Jegan, learned counsel
for the respondents.
H
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. v. PUSHPAVATHI & ORS. ETC. 439
[ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, J.]
16. Mr. R. Venkataramani, learned senior counsel for the appellants A
while assailing the legality and the correctness of the impugned judgment,
reiterated the same submissions, which were unsuccessfully urged before
the High Court.
17. While elaborating his submissions, learned counsel contended
that the High Court erred in entertaining the writ petitions for deciding B
the issue raised therein on merits.
18. According to learned counsel, the issue relating to non-award
of the interest by the Collector under Section 28A(2) proceedings is
triable only by the Reference Court (Civil Court) in the reference
proceedings, therefore, the remedy of the respondents (landowners) was C
to approach the Collector under Section 28A(3) of the Act for making a
reference to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Act and then pursue
the issue further in the forums provided under the Act but not in filing the
writ petitions before the High Court.
19. Learned counsel urged that the non-award of interest by the D
Collector/LAO under Section 11 or Section 28A(2) proceedings being a
part of the award, it attracts the rigour of Section 18 of the Act.
20. Learned counsel urged that if there is any error noticed in the
award, the same can be challenged only before the Civil Court in the
reference proceedings under Section 18 or Section 28A(3) of the Act, E
as the case may be.
21. Learned counsel urged that when the Act is a complete code
in itself and provides therein a statutory remedy of reference under
Section 18 read with Section 28A(3) of the Act for determination of all
the issues pertaining to compensation payable to the landowners for F
their acquired land, the High Court should not have entertained the writ
petitions and instead granted liberty to the respondents (landowners) to
take recourse to the remedy of reference to the Civil Court under Section
28A(3) of the Act.
22. In reply, learned counsel for the respondents (landowners)
G
supported the reasoning and the conclusion arrived at by the High Court
in the impugned judgment and contended that no case is made out for
any interference in the impugned judgment.
23. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal
of the record of the case, we find no merit in the appeals. In our view,
H
440 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2018] 10 S.C.R.
A the reasoning and the conclusion arrived at by the High Court appears to
be legal and proper.
24. The short question, which arises for consideration in these
appeals is, if the Collector declines to award interest on the compensation
under Section 28A proceedings to the landowners, which is the legal
B remedy available to the landowners against such order–the landowners
should approach the Civil Court in reference under Section 28A(3) read
with Section 18 of the Act or should file writ petition under Article 226 of
the Constitution.
25. In order to decide the question arising in these appeals, some
C relevant sections need mention. These Sections are Sections 11, 18, 23,
26, 28, 28-A and 34 of the Act which are mentioned verbatim infra.
Section 11
“11 Enquiry and award by Collector (1) :- On the day so
fixed, or any other day to which the enquiry has been
D adjourned, the Collector shall proceed to enquire into the
objections (if any) which any person interested has stated
pursuant to a notice given under section 9 to the
measurements made under section 8, and into the value of
the land at the date of the publication of the notification
E under section 4, sub-section (1), and into the respective
interests of the persons claiming the compensation, and
shall make an award under his hand of—
(i) the true area of the land;
(ii) the compensation which in his opinion should be
F allowed for the land; and
(iii) the apportionment of the said compensation among
all the persons known or believed to be interested in
the land, of whom, or of whose claims, he has information,
whether or not they have respectively appeared before
G him:
Provided that no award shall be made by the Collector
under this sub-section without the previous approval of the
appropriate Government or of such officer as the appropriate
Government may authorise in this behalf:
H
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. v. PUSHPAVATHI & ORS. ETC. 441
[ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, J.]
Provided further that it shall be competent for the A
appropriate Government to direct that the Collector may
make such award without such approval in such class of
cases as the appropriate Government may specify in this
behalf.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section B
(1), if at any stage of the proceedings, the Collector is
satisfied that all the persons interested in the land who
appeared before him have agreed in writing on the matters
to be included in the award of the Collector in the form
prescribed by rules made by the appropriate Government,
he may, without making further enquiry, make an award C
according to the terms of such agreement.
(3) The determination of compensation for any land
under sub-section (2) shall not, in any way affect the
determination of compensation in respect of other lands in
the same locality or elsewhere in accordance with the other D
provisions of this Act.
(4) Notwithstanding anything contained in the
Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908), no agreement made
under sub-section (2) shall be liable to registration under
the Act.
E
Section 18
18. Reference to Court (1) Any person interested who has
not accepted the award may, by written application to the
Collector, require that the matter be referred by the
Collector for the determination of the Court, whether his
objection be to the measurement of the land, the amount of F
the compensation, the persons to whom it is payable, or
the apportionment of the compensation among the persons
interested.
(2) The application shall state the grounds on which
objection to the award is taken: G
Provided that every such application shall be made,—
(a) if the person making it was present or represented
before the Collector at the time when he made his award,
within six weeks from the date of the Collector’s award; H
442 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2018] 10 S.C.R.
A (b) in other cases, within six weeks of the receipt of the
notice from the Collector under section 12, sub-section
(2), or within six months from the date of the Collector’s
award, whichever period shall first expire.
Section 23
B
23. Matters to be considered in determining compensation
(1) In determining the amount of compensation to be
awarded for land acquired under this Act, the Court shall
take into consideration—
C first, the market value of the land at the date of the
publication of the notification under section 4, sub-
section (1)
secondly, the damage sustained by the person interested,
by reason of the taking of any standing crops or trees
D which may be on the land at the time of the Collector’s
taking possession thereof;
thirdly, the damage (if any), sustained by the person
interested, at the time of the Collector’s taking
possession of the land, by reason of severing such land
E from his other land;
fourthly, the damage (if any), sustained by the person
interested, at the time of the Collector’s taking
possession of the land, by reason of the acquisition
injuriously affecting his other property, movable or
F immovable, in any other manner, or his earnings;
fifthly, if, in consequence of the acquisition of the land by
the Collector, the person interested is compelled to
change his residence or place of business, the reasonable
expenses (if any) incidental to such change; and
G
sixthly, the damage (if any) bona fide resulting from
diminution of the profits of the land between the time of
the publication of the declaration under section 6 and
the time of the Collector’s taking possession of the land.
H
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. v. PUSHPAVATHI & ORS. ETC. 443
[ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, J.]
(1A) In addition to the market value of the land, as above A
provided, the Court shall in every case award an amount
calculated at the rate of twelve per centum per annum on
such market-value for the period commencing on and from
the date of the publication of the notification under section
4, sub-section (1), in respect of such land to the date of the
B
award of the Collector or the date of taking possession of
the land, whichever is earlier.
Explanation.—In computing the period referred to in this
sub-section, any period or periods during which the
proceedings for the acquisition of the land were held up on
account of any stay or injunction by the order of any Court C
shall be excluded.
(2) In addition to the market-value of the land, as above
provided, the Court shall in every case award a sum of thirty
per centum on such market-value, in consideration of the
compulsory nature of the acquisition. D
Section 26
26. Form of awards :- (1) Every award under this Part
shall be in writing signed by the Judge, and shall specify
the amount awarded under clause first of sub-section (1) E
of section 23, and also the amounts (if any) respectively
awarded under each of the other clauses of the same
sub-section, together with the grounds of awarding each
of the said amounts.
(2) Every such award shall be deemed to be a decree F
and the statement of the grounds of every such award a
judgment within the meaning of section 2, clause (2) and
section 2, clause (9), respectively, of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908).
Section 28
G
28. Collector may be directed to pay interest on excess
compensation. —If the sum which, in the opinion of the
Court, the Collector ought to have awarded as
compensation is in excess of the sum which the Collector
H
444 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2018] 10 S.C.R.
A did award as compensation, the award of the Court may
direct that the Collector shall pay interest on such excess
at the rate of nine per centum per annum from the date
on which he took possession of the land to the date of
payment of such excess into Court:
B Provided that the award of the Court may also direct
that where such excess or any part thereof is paid into
Court after the date of expiry of a period of one year
from the date on which possession is taken, interest at
the rate of fifteen per centum per annum shall be payable
from the date of expiry of the said period of one year on
C the amount of such excess or part thereof which has not
been paid into Court before the date of such expiry.
Section 28A
28A. Re-determination of the amount of compensation
D on the basis of the award of the Court:- (1) Where in an
award under this Part, the Court allows to the applicant
any amount of compensation in excess of the amount
awarded by the Collector under section 11, the persons
interested in all the other land covered by the same
notification under section 4, sub-section (1) and who are
E also aggrieved by the award of the Collector may,
notwithstanding that they had not made an application to
the Collector under section 18, by written application to
the Collector within three months from the date of the
award of the Court require that the amount of
F compensation payable to them may be re-determined on
the basis of the amount of compensation awarded by the
Court:
Provided that in computing the period of three months
within which an application to the Collector shall be made
G under this sub-section, the day on which the award was
pronounced and the time requisite for obtaining a copy
of the award shall be excluded.
(2) The Collector shall, on receipt of an application under
sub-section (1), conduct an inquiry after giving notice to
H
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. v. PUSHPAVATHI & ORS. ETC. 445
[ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, J.]
all the persons interested and giving them a reasonable A
opportunity of being heard, and make an award
determining the amount of compensation payable to the
applicants.
(3) Any person who has not accepted the award under
sub-section (2) may, by written application to the B
Collector, require that the matter be referred by the
Collector for the determination of the Court and the
provisions of sections 18 to 28 shall, so far as may be,
apply to such reference as they apply to a reference under
section 18.
C
Section 34
34 Payment of interest:- When the amount of such
compensation is not paid or deposited on or before
taking possession of the land, the Collector shall pay
the amount awarded with interest thereon at the rate D
of nine per centum per annum from the time of so taking
possession until it shall have been so paid or deposited:
Provided that if such compensation or any part thereof
is not paid or deposited within a period of one year from
the date on which possession is taken, interest at the E
rate of fifteen per centum per annum shall be payable
from the date of expiry of the said period of one year on
the amount of compensation or part thereof which has
not been paid or deposited before the date of such
expiry.”
F
26. Section 11 deals with making of enquiry and award by the
Collector. This section provides three Heads under which the award is
to be made, namely, (i) the true area of the land; (ii) the compensation
which in his opinion is payable to the landowners; (iii) the apportionment
of the compensation among all the persons interested in the land.
G
27. Section 18 provides a remedy to those persons, who have not
accepted the award of the Collector passed under Section 11 of the Act.
Such persons can request the Collector to make reference to the Civil
Court to decide the issues. These issues are: first - relating to
measurement of the land, second - the amount of compensation, third -
H
446 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2018] 10 S.C.R.
A the persons to whom the compensation is payable and fourth - the
apportionment of the compensation among the persons interested.
28. Section 23 of the Act provides six factors, which are required
to be taken into consideration by the Court while determining the
compensation. Sub-sections (1A) and (2) provide for payment of statutory
B compensation payable to every landowner in addition to the market value
of the land. Under sub-section (1A), the landowner is paid the
compensation at the rate of 12% p.a. of the market value of the land
whereas under sub-section(2), he is paid at the rate of 30% of the market
value of his land.
C 29. Section 26 provides the form of awards. It provides that, first
it shall specify the amount awarded under clause first of sub-section(1)
of Section 23 and also the amounts, if any, awarded under each of the
other clauses of the same sub-section together with the grounds of
awarding each of the said amounts.
D 30. There are two sections, which deal with the payment of interest,
namely, Section 28 and Section 34. So far as Section 28 is concerned, it
deals with the payment of interest on excess compensation. It empowers
the Civil Court to award interest on the excess amount awarded over
and above the amount by the Collector. It empowers the Court to direct
the Collector to pay interest at the rate of 9% p.a. on such excess amount
E awarded by the Court from the date on which the Collector took
possession of the land to the date of payment of such excess amount
into Court. The proviso to Section 28 further enables the Court to award
interest on such excess amount if the conditions specified in the proviso
are fulfilled in any acquisition proceedings in relation to the land.
F 31. So far as Section 34 is concerned, it deals with another mode
of payment of interest to the landowners. It provides that if compensation
is not paid or deposited on or before taking possession of the land, the
Collector shall pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the time of
so taking possession until it shall have been so paid or deposited. Proviso
G to this section, however, empowers the Collector to pay interest at the
rate of 15% p.a., if the conditions specified therein are fulfilled in any
acquisition case.
32. Section 28A provides for re-determination of the amount of
compensation on the basis of the award of the Court. It enables the
H
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. v. PUSHPAVATHI & ORS. ETC. 447
[ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, J.]
landowners to approach the Collector to re-determine the amount of A
compensation payable to them on the basis of the award passed by the
Court in the cases of other persons alike them whose lands were also
acquired under the same notification of Section 4 and who approached
the Court for re-determination of the amount of compensation payable
to them whereas other landowners did not approach the Court along
B
with them. Such landowners are given a right to make an application
within 3 months from the date of such award of the Court to the Collector
and claim therein the same compensation which was awarded to other
landowners by the Court. Sub-section(2) of Section 28A empowers the
Collector to conduct an inquiry and make an award determining the
amount of compensation payable to such landowners. Sub-section(3) of C
Section 28A empowers the landowners to approach the Collector to
refer his/their case to the Court in case he/they is/are aggrieved by the
award passed by the Collector under sub-section(2) of Section 28A of
the Act.
33. From the perusal of the aforementioned sections, it is clear D
that while determining the compensation payable to the landowners, the
Collector is required to take into consideration three factors, which are
specified under Section 11 whereas the Court is required to take into
consideration six factors specified under Section 23(1) of the Act. These
factors vary from case to case.
E
34. Likewise, we find that Sections 28 and 34, which deal with
payment of interest on the awarded sum, are attracted in the case
where the conditions specified under the respective sections
are fulfilled by the landowner in his case.
35. Similarly, the reference to the Court under Section 18 is made F
by the Collector only when there is a dispute as to the measurement of
the land or to the amount of the compensation or as to the person(s) to
whom the compensation is payable and lastly, regarding the apportionment
of the compensation amongst the persons interested in claiming
compensation.
G
36. In our considered opinion, the dispute relating to non-award of
the interest to the landowners, whether under Section 28 or Section 34 is
not a dispute, which falls under Section 18 or/and 28A(3) of the Act. In
other words, a reference under Section 18 can only be made by the
Collector in respect of those issues, which are specified under Section 18.
H
448 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2018] 10 S.C.R.
A 37. A dispute relating to non-award of interest payable to the
landowners under Section 28 or/and Section 34 of the Act is not specified
under Section 18 and hence it is not capable of being referred by the
Collector to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Act. It is also for the
reason that payment of interest is statutory in character and being
statutory, it is mandatory for payment once conditions specified under
B
Sections 28 or/and 34 are fulfilled.
38. It is true that once the interest is awarded by the Court under
section 28 or by the Collector under Section 34 of the Act, it becomes
the part of the award. However, it is hardly of any significance and has
no bearing for deciding the question of remedy to challenge issue relating
C to the non-award of interest.
39. As mentioned above, such issue is required to be decided
keeping in view the wording of Section 18 of the Act, which specifies
the issues on which the reference can be made to the Court and non-
award of interest is not the issue specified in Section 18 of the Act. In
D this view of the matter, no reference can be made to the Court to decide
the issue of non-award of interest under Section 18 of the Act.
40. The aforementioned reasoning, in our view, equally applies to
the cases falling under Section 28A(2) and (3) of the Act because any
dispute, whether arising under Section 11 or 28A(2), is referable to the
E Civil Court in reference by the Collector under Section 18 of the Act.
41. This Court explained the object and scope of Sections 28 and
34 succinctly in the case of Shree Vijay Cotton & Oil Mills Ltd. vs.
State of Gujarat, (1991) 1 SCC 262 in the following words:
F “16. There is inherent evidence in the wording of Sections
28 and 34 to show that the framers of the Act intended to
assure the payment of interest to the person whose land
was acquired and it was not the intention to subject the
said payment to procedural hazards. Section 34 lays down
that “the Collector shall pay the amount awarded with
G interest at 6 per cent per annum….” The legislative
mandate is clear. It is a directive to the collector to pay the
interest in a given circumstance. Section 34 nowhere says
that the interest amount is to be included in the award-
decree as prepared under Section 23(1) read with Section
26 of the Act. Similarly Section 28 provides “the award of
H
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. v. PUSHPAVATHI & ORS. ETC. 449
[ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, J.]
the court may direct that the Collector shall pay interest”. A
Here also the award under Section 23(1) read with Section
26 has been kept distinct from the payment of interest
under the section. The interest to be paid under Section
34 and also under Section 28 is of different character than
the compensation amount under Section 23(1) of the Act.
B
Whereas the interest, if payable under the Act, can be
claimed at any stage of the proceedings under the Act, the
amount of compensation under Section 23(1) which is an
award-decree under Section 26, is subject to the rules of
Procedure and Limitation. The rules of procedure are hand-
maiden of justice. The procedural hassle cannot come in C
the way of substantive rights of citizens under the Act.”
42. In the light of the foregoing discussion, we are of the considered
opinion that the dispute in relation to non-award of interest can be raised
by an aggrieved person only by taking recourse to Article 226 of the
Constitution in writ petition. In other words, reference under Section 18 D
or Section 28A(3) cannot be considered to be an alternative statutory
remedy available to the landowner for getting the question of non-award
of interest payable under Sections 28 or/and 34 of the Act decided by
the Civil Court.
43. This Court in the case of Delhi Development Authority E
vs. Mahender Singh & Anr. , (2009) 5 SCC 339 has also taken the
same view, which we have taken above, in the following words:
“12. In view of what has been indicated above, the
conclusion is irresistible that while exercising jurisdiction
under Article 226 of the Constitution there is no scope for F
direction to pay interest in a manner not contemplated by
either Section 28 or 34.”
44. In view of the foregoing discussion, we are of the view that
the High Court was right in entertaining the writ petitions filed by the
respondents (landowners) and was eventfully right in allowing the same G
on merits.
45. Learned counsel for the appellants did not question the
impugned judgment on merits, therefore, we need not examine the issue
involved in the writ petitions on merits.
H
450 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2018] 10 S.C.R.
A 46. In the light of the foregoing discussion, we find no merit in
these appeals. The appeals thus fail and are accordingly dismissed.
In C. A. Nos. 1632-1641 OF 2018 @ SLP (C) Nos.20089-
20098 of 2012 & C. A. Nos. 1642-1643 OF 2018 @ SLP (C)
Nos.21043-21044 of 2012]
B Leave granted.
These appeals are directed against the final judgment and order
dated 22.03.2010 passed by the High Court of Madras in W.P.(c)
Nos.5596 to 5605 of 2010 and dated 02.12.2011 in W.P.(c) Nos. 1556-
1557 of 2006 whereby the Single Judge of the High Court disposed of
C the writ petitions filed by the respondents herein on the basis of the
order dated 08.07.2009 passed in W.A. Nos.1384 to 1392 and 1755 of
1999.
In view of judgment passed in civil appeals @ S.L.P.(c) Nos.
4689-4698 of 2012, these appeals fail and are accordingly dismissed.
D
Ankit Gyan Appeals dismissed.
E
F
G
H
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "Land acquisition"Sign in to search