2025 INSC 285
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(HON’BLE
SANJIV KHANNA, CJI. AND HON’BLE SANJAY KUMAR, JJ.)
DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/
COLLECTOR,
Petitioner
VERSUS
HEERA LAL
Respondent
Civil Appeal Nos. OF 2025 (arising out
of SLP(C) Nos. 25463-25464 of 2024)-Decided on 24-02-2025
Land
acquisition
Land acquisition –
Compensation –
Remand back - Held that impugned judgment proceeds on the basis of
contradictory stands taken by the district administration but does not deal
with the factual issue in question - Factual aspect that arises for
consideration is as to whether the appellants are in possession of 3 Biswa of
land belonging and left with respondent No. 1,
and have constructed a road thereon - It is this aspect which has to be
examined and decided by the High Court - Impugned judgment liable to be set
aside and matter remanded to the High Court to decide afresh Writ-C No.
16762/2017, titled “Heera Lal v. State of U.P. & Ors.” - Whilst
deciding the matter, the High Court may call upon the parties to file
additional affidavits and may also require the District/State authorities to file satellite images to establish the factual position.
(Para
2, 6 to 8)
ORDER
1.
Leave granted.
2.
The impugned judgment, in our opinion, proceeds on the basis of contradictory
stands taken by the district administration but does not deal with the factual
issue in question.
3.
As far as the conflicting stands taken by the district administration are
concerned, it is stated that departmental proceedings have been initiated
against the erring officer(s).
4.
Respondent No. 1, Heera Lal, was the owner of 8 biswa of land in Plot No. 606/2
situated in Village Sukrit, Pargana Ahraura, Tehsil Chunar, District Sonbhadra,
Uttar Pradesh. He sold 4 biswa of land to one Mrs.
Badrunisha and 1 biswa of land to Mrs. Gyan Devi. He was, therefore, left with
3 biswa of land.
5.
Respondent No. 1, Heera Lal, claims that the district administration took
possession of 4 biswa of land for construction of a road but no compensation
has been paid to him.
6.
During the course of hearing, the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.
1, Heera Lal, has drawn our attention to the Site
Inspection and Demarcation Report dated 15.11.2018 which records the facts, as
noted above. In the end, the report states that the area of vacant land of Gata
No. 606/2 on the side of Varanasi-Shaktinagar can be taken by Heera Lal.
Respondent No. 1, Heera Lal, claims that he has not been given the possession
of the said land in spite of the Site Inspection and Demarcation Report dated
15.11.2018. The appellants do not dispute that respondent No. 1, Heera Lal, is
the owner of 3 biswa of land in Plot No. 606/2. Thus, the factual aspect that
arises for consideration is as to whether the appellants are in possession of 3
biswa of land belonging and left with respondent No. 1, Heera Lal, and have
constructed a road thereon. It is this aspect which has to be examined and
decided by the High Court.
7.
In view of the aforesaid discussion, we set aside the impugned judgment and
pass an order of remand to the High Court to decide afresh Writ-C No.
16762/2017, titled “Heera Lal v. State of U.P. & Ors.”. Whilst
deciding the matter, the High Court may call upon the parties to file
additional affidavits and may also require the District/State authorities to
file satellite images to establish the factual position.
8.
The impugned judgment/order dated 30.08.2018 is accordingly set aside and the
appeals are allowed in the above terms.
9.
The judgment/order dated 26.07.2024 passed in Civil Misc. Review Application
No. 04/2019 in Writ-C No. 16762/2017 will also stand set aside in the above
terms.
10.
We, however, clarify that we have not commented on the merits of the case. The
High Court will decide the aforesaid writ petition independently without being
influenced by the reasons and findings recorded in the impugned judgment/order
dated 30.08.2018.
11.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
------