AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 1140
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... (C) No.562/2019 in SLP(C) No.6933/2007, CONMT.PET. (C) No.563/2019 in SLP(C) No.6933/2007, CONMT.PET. (C) No.564/2019 in SLP(C) No.6933/2007, CONMT.PET. (C) No.685/2019 in SLP(C) No.6933/2007, CONMT.PET. (C) No.686/2019 in SLP(C) No.6933/2007, CONMT.PET. (C) No.687/2019 in SLP(C) No.6933/2007, CONMT.PET. (C) No.548/2019 in SLP(C) No.6933/2007, CONMT.PET. (C) No.549/2019 in SLP(C) No.6933/2007, CONMT.PET. (C) No.550/2019 in SLP(C) No.6933/2007, CONMT.PET. (C) No.551/2019 in SLP(C) No.6933/2007, CONMT.PET. (C) No.552/2019 in SLP(C) No.6933/2007, SLP(C) No.15877-15878/2020 UDAY UMESH LALIT, CJI, S. RAVINDRA BHAT AND BELA M. TRIVEDI] JJ. For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shibashish Misra, AOR,Ms. Nandini Gidwaney, AOR, Mr. Atma Ram Nadkarni, Sr. Adv., Mr. Anish Kumar Gupta, AOR, Ms. Archana Preeti Gupta, Adv., Ms. Rita Gupta, Adv., Mr. Puneet Sheoran, Adv., Mr. Rohit Singh, Adv., Mr. Nisarg Choudhary, Adv., Mr. Avdhesh Kumar Singh, Adv., Mr. Santosh Rebello, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Vishal Arun, AOR, Mr. Shankar Divate, AOR, Ms. Anindita Pujari, AOR Ms. Prakriti Rastogi, Adv, Mr. Azad bansala, Adv., Mr. Ashok Panigrahi, AOR, Mr. Nabab Singh, Adv, Ms. Geetanjali Das Krishnan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ied lands. Finally, by notification dated 10.07.1989, the declaration of acquisition of the land under Section 9 of the CBA Act was made, which led to the lands being vested absolutely in the Central Government. On 20.03.1993, the Central Government issued notification under Section 11 of the CBA Act, vesting the acquired land and all rights therein in MCL, retrospectively with effect from 17.11.1991. The writ petitioners before the High Court were landowners who were not paid any compensation for their lands. After unavailingly seeking the same, the landowners approached the High Court seeking direction for compensation. Before the High Court, the landowners' claims were mired in a dispute between Coal India Ltd. (hereinafter, "CIL") and the Central Government. CIL urged that it no longer required the lands, whereas the Central Government rejected CIL's proposal for denotification by order dated 12.09.2006. The High Court held that a land oustee under Section 9 of the CBA Act was to be paid compensation after taking into consideration the factors enumerated under Section 13(5) of the CBA Act. MCL preferred a special leave petition before this court. The court sought the assistance....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mission will examine whether possession of such portions has been taken over by the petitioner. It would be open to the Claims Commission to recommend denotification/release of the said land from acquisition. 7. In view of the special facts obtaining above, the Central Government may be permitted to denotify the said land from the acquisition as a special case, since the land is not required and possession also was never taken. 8. Even in the case of the denotified land, suitable compensation, in appropriate cases, may have to be paid to the landowners. The Claims Commission may also give a report on this aspect of the matter. 9. The learned Solicitor General has opined that such matters of uncertain acquisition or pending compensation claims lead to unnecessary social tensions and the petitioner must act in a spirit of good governance. Upon examination of all the surrounding villages, in the light of the opinion of the learned Solicitor General, for the sake of uniformity as well as fairness, the above exercise would be carried out for the following villages as well: (i) Sardega (ii) Jhupurunga (iii) Ratansara (iv) Tik....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t later than four months from today. In case the Commission recommends denotification/release of any portion of the lands earlier acquired, it would also determine the rate or the amount of compensation/mesne profit payable to the landholder. The Commission shall submit its report not to the Central Government but to this Court for approval and further directions. Any denotification/release of the land would be only subject to further orders passed by this Court in light of the Commission's report. The Commission may proceed with the survey in relation to the acquired lands in other villages, as suggested in Para 9 of the scheme only after submitting its report in respect of Village Gopalpur and subject to further orders by this Court. The officers of the State Government and the Coal Company shall extend full help and cooperation to the Commission in preparing the report and in the discharge of their duties in terms of the scheme." 5. The Claims Commission appointed by this court proceeded to issue notices and call for claims to determine all those eligible for compensation and rehabilitation, and its extent. Based on the report in relation to village Gopalpur, the court pa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... up schools and health centres in the villages affected by land acquisition. In case, the rehabilitation policy does not have such provisions, the Commission may consider directing Mahanadi Coal Fields Ltd. to provide for good, functional schools with sufficient number of teachers and well-equipped health centres in all the villages affected by land acquisition. We would also like to remind the Commission that the good work done by it so far will only be complete as and when the individual villagers whose lands are acquired actually receive the amount of compensation and other benefits under the compensation and rehabilitation package. We are sure that the Commission would be conscious of this aspect of the matter. But, we would still like to tell it that all the good work done by it may be dissipated unless the villagers get their lawful dues in full and no part of compensation amount or any element of the compensation/rehabilitation package is allowed to be wasted or taken away from the concerned landholder by deception or fraudulent means. It will be, therefore, open to the Commission also to frame proper. policies for payment of the compensation money and to ensure tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....which compensation ls yet to be fixed by it. Let the report received from the Commission be kept in a sealed cover. Put up on receipt of further report from the Claims Commission, Bhubaneshwar." 7. By its order dated 10.04.2013, this court accepted and approved the Commission's reports with respect to villages Kulda and Garjan Bahal. By another order dated 15.07.2013, this court accepted the Commission's report for village Karlikachhar. In that order, the court further observed that lands in two villages namely Kirpsira and Ratansara were transferred by the Central Government to some other companies. The court therefore requested the Commission to proceed in respect of the two villages and directed that at the initial stage, payment of compensation would be MCL's liability - it could later recover the sums from the successor companies. By its order dated 25.10.2013, this court observed that infrastructure for resettlement was to be in terms of Odisha Resettlement and Rehabilitation Policy, 2006 (hereinafter, "R&R Policy 2006") and the Third Schedule to the (then) Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, 2013.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....paid in accordance with the Orders of the Court. (vi) where genuine cases of fraud and impersonation are alleged by MCL, the Claims Commission be empowered to examine such cases and forward recommendations to the Learned Amicus. (vii) Direct the authorities of MCL to complete the process of granting employment, payment of monetary compensation in lieu of employment, including annuities on or before 31st July 201 7 with respect to 8 villages (namely Balinga, Bankibahal, Garjan Bahal, Gopalpur, Karlikachar, Kunda, Sardega and Tiklipada) and on or before 31st November, 2017 with respect to 2 villages (namely Siarmal and Bangurkela) . (viii) Issue directions to the Chairman and Managing Director of MCL to immediately stop any illegal mining being undertaken by MCL on agricultural lands in any of the villages. (ix) Issue directions to MCL authorities to complete the development of resettlement colonies in the two sites (namely Barapalli II and Chatanpalli) on or before 30th September, 2017. (x) Once even one of the rehabilitation sites is ready and the site has been certified as suitable for shifting by the Claims Commission, the Hon'ble ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Orissa Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy 2006. Learned Amicus states that the recommendation is consistent with the report of Parichha Commission which has already been accepted by this Court. This aspect of the matter may be gone into by the High Court, if necessary. One of the issues which is surviving is as regards constructed housing on the land allocated for rehabilitation and resettlement by the affected persons. Mr. Dhankar, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants states that it is not clear whether all such persons want constructed housing or not. A notice will therefore be put in the Office of the District Collector seeking objection to such construction. Those who do not expressly indicate their option to go for housing other than the constructed housing offered by the appellant, such option to be indicated within one week of the notice, they will be presumed to be willing to opt for the allotment of such housing constructed by appellant. We do accept that necessary basic health amenities as already directed by this Court will be duly provided at the site. Subject to the above, it will be open for the High Court/Commission, keeping in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cut-off date'); ii. Point no. 2: Applicability of the R&R Act, 2013; iii. Point no. 3, 4 and 5: Whether the R&R Policy 2006 applied, or the subsequent policy of 2013; If the latter policy (of 2013) applied, then for the purpose of employment benefits, whether the family unit was deemed to be represented by a singular member, or several of them; and whether the Commission could re-open determinations based on change of policies of the State, after its report was accepted by this court; iv. Point no. 6: Entitlement to housing plots; and v. Point no. 7: Creation of facilities and amenities, such as schools, community centres, medical facilities, etc. B. Analysis 12. Prior to delving into a point-by-point analysis, it is instrumental to allude to the case of State of M.P. v. Narmada Bachao Andolan, State of M.P. v. Narmada Bachao Andolan, (2011) 7 SCC 639 which highlighted the essence of rehabilitation through the lens of Article 21 of the Constitution: "Land acquisition and rehabilitation : Article 21 26. It is desirable for the authority concerned to ensure that as far as practicable persons who had been living and carr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nkage between the land and the person's status in [the] social system". 28. However, in case of land acquisition, "the plea of deprivation of right to livelihood under Article 21 is unsustainable". (Vide Chameli Singh v. State of U.P. [(1996) 2 SCC 549 : AIR 1996 SC 1051] and Samatha v. State of A.P. [(1997) 8 SCC 191 : AIR 1997 SC 3297] ) This Court has consistently held that Article 300-A is not only a constitutional right but also a human right. (Vide Lachhman Dass v. Jagat Ram [(2007) 10 SCC 448] and Amarjit Singh v. State of Punjab [(2010) 10 SCC 43 : (2010) 4 SCC (Cri) 29] .) However, in Jilubhai Nanbhai Khachar v. State of Gujarat [1995 Supp (1) SCC 596 : AIR 1995 SC 142] this Court held : (SCC pp. 620 & 632, paras 30 & 58) "30. Thus it is clear that right to property under Article 300-A is not a basic feature or structure of the Constitution. It is only a constitutional right. ... *** 58. ... The principle of unfairness of the procedure attracting Article 21 does not apply to the acquisition or deprivation of property under Article 300-A giving effect to the directive principles." 29. This Court in Narmada Bachao Andolan (1) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onsistent, in principle, as anything else would mean that the Commission, and this court, would be applying different standards. 14. Mr. Atmaram Nadkarni, learned senior counsel appearing for MCL, urged that the Gopalpur approach was universally adopted as the correct one by the Commission, based on which reports for other villages were prepared, and consequently compensation amounts determined. As a consequence, the landowners also stood to benefit, because the date of September 2010 was a uniform one, on the basis of which compensation and all other amounts were determinable. It was further submitted that so far as the question of delay or prejudice was concerned, there could be no cause for complaint, because there was sufficient safeguard in law, by way of award of interest, for delayed payment. It was submitted that if this court were to revisit the issue, settled matters that had attained finality, would be opened and the process of compensation determination thrown into uncertainty, which would not be to the benefit of anyone, including the land owners. 15. The Parichha Commission, in its report relating to village Gopalpur, explained the reasons why the date for deter....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... contention of MCL, that compensation amounts should be determined having regard to one single cut-off date, i.e., September 2010. Given the fact that this court was alive to the plight of the landowners who had not been paid any amount for over 22 years when the first judgment was delivered, which led to the setting up of the Commission and the evolution of the Gopalpur model, whereby survey was undertaken for the first time after September 2010, that date should be the reckonable one. If one keeps in mind the fact that had the compensation determination been based on the date of issuance of the preliminary notification, it would have plainly resulted in injustice to the landowners. Instead, the shifting of the date to September 2010, and the further recompense to the landowners based on that cut-off date, inures to their benefit. The shifting of dates again would spell uncertainty, and also lead to a real possibility of delay in the computation of compensation and other benefits to the landowners who were deprived of their rights. In these circumstances, the court is of the opinion that reopening the issue would lead to considerable uncertainty, because settled cases would invari....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....has to be prepared by the Collector after consultation with displaced families. The resettlement site is selected by the RPDAC, based upon the consent of the villagers, post which, an intimation is sent to the required body (in the present case, MCL). According to MCL, this site for resettlement has been finalised. The Collector, pursuant to an order of this court, had filed a report on 03.11.2020. The report covers a large number of rehabilitation and resettlement villages and also lists that in relation to 12 villages, 326 objections were received by the Collector. After verification exercises, the Collector has reported that the list with respect to rehabilitation and resettlement needed the approval by the Government; and the Collector had to prepare a report in consultation with the displaced families. The RPDAC had to select the site, gram sabhas had to be held, displacement certificates had to be issued to persons, in addition to which they had to be provided building assistance of minimum Rs.2,40,000/-. 18. Consequently, the date fixed in the Gopalpur report, by the Commission (i.e., September, 2010) would be the basis for compensation determination. Apart from compensat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....land oustees filed Claim Cases with a prayer to provide them compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. This Commission vide order dated 19.6.2015 passed in Claim Case No.27 and vide order dated 30.10.2018 passed in Claim Case No. 130 and order dated 08.12.2018 passed in Claim Case No.10/1 & 27 others, after hearing the Counsel appearing in those cases and the petitioners in person, dismissed those cases. All other cases involving similar issue were also dismissed in terms of the above cases." 23. Section 105 of the R&R Act 2013 reads as follows: 105. Provisions of this Act not to apply in certain cases or to apply with certain notifications.-(1) Subject to sub-section (3), the provisions of this Act shall not apply to the enactments relating to land acquisition specified in the Fourth Schedule. (2) Subject to sub-section (2) of section 106, the Central Government may, by notification, omit or add to any of the enactments specified in the Fourth Schedule. (3) The Central Government shall, by notification, within one year from the date of commencement of this Act, dir....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....irst, Second and Third Schedules of the R&R Act, 2013 in cases of acquisition of lands under the CBA Act. The clarification stated as under: "1....That consequent upon the announcement of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013( hereinafter 'RFCTLARR Act') and Order SO No. 2368(E). notified on 28.08.2015 by Ministry of Rural Development, Coal India Limited and its subsidiaries have sought clarifications regarding payment of compensation for land acquired prior to 01.09.2015 under Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development Act. 1957(hereinafter the 'CBA Act') 2. As multiple stages are involved in the land acquisition process, including that of determination of compensation, this Ministry sought advice from Ministry of Law and Justice. Ministry of Law and Justice has given their advice that if the compensation has not been determined before 01.09.2015 under Section 13(5) of the CBA Act, then the provisions of First Schedule, Second Schedule and Third Schedule of the RFCTLARR Act will be applicable. In remaining cases where the compensation has already been determined under Sec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rliament through a Bill. The order of 25.10.2013 only expressly alludes to the Bill. In other words, the court could not foresee the sequence in which the provisions of the R&R Act, 2013 would be applicable. The order of this Court nowhere indicated that whether the R&R Act - which was to be enacted, and come into force later - was applicable to all land acquisition proceedings including those pending consideration at various levels and before various courts, and whether the body of the new enactment sought to exclude from its purview acquisitions made under enactments other than the erstwhile Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as the R&R Act, 2013 eventually did, through Section 105 and the Fourth Schedule. 29. There can be no doubt that for the period between 01.01.2014 and 28.08.2015, ongoing acquisitions processes under enactments specified in the Fourth Schedule - such as the CBA Act - were out of purview of the R&R Act, 2013. However, with the publication of the notification under Section 113 read with Section 105(3) on 28.08.2015, the legal position underwent a transformation. Acquisition processes, especially compensation determination as well as calculation and disbursement of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as prepared on 04.04.2020 and thereafter filed in court, awaiting its approval. The report in respect of the village Jhupuranga has been placed on record; the same is pending approval of this court. 33. This court is of the opinion that with the issuance of the notification on 28.10.2015 and the clarification by the Central Government to MCL on 04.08.2017, the question of paying or depositing compensation in terms of the CBA Act cannot arise after 28.10.2015. This is because the requirement of compensation determination under the CBA Act ceased by virtue of Section 105(3). The statutory regime under the CBA Act was superseded and substituted with the provisions of the First Schedule to the R&R Act, 2013. 34. In the light of the above discussion, it is held that the First Schedule of the R&R Act, 2013 is applicable to the acquisition in question, made by the Central Government in favour of MCL, in respect of the villages, the reports of which were not approved prior to 28.10.2015. Accordingly, the compensation based upon the market value for the four villages i.e., Tumulia, Jhupuranga, Ratansara, and Kirpsara have to be re-determined in accordance with the provisions of the Fi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vered pursuant to which Gopalpur report was approved. Besides, the subsequent reports have also gone by the 2006 policy. In these circumstances, there is no question to say that the 2013 policy would apply, with the reopening of past cases resulting in chaos and uncertainty. It would prolong the process of determining the rehabilitation and resettlement benefits and also ensuring that they are received by the beneficiaries. Furthermore, adopting the 2013 amendment would result in applying two sets of norms for the purpose of one acquisition. 37. Section 108 of the R&R Act, 2013 reads as follows: "108. Option to affected families to avail better compensation and rehabilitation and resettlement.-(1) Where a State law or a policy framed by the Government of a State provides for a higher compensation than calculated this Act for the acquisition of land, the affected persons or his family or member of his family may at their option opt to avail such higher compensation and rehabilitation and resettlement under such State law or such policy of the State. (2) Where a State law or a policy framed by the Government of a State offers more beneficial rehabilitation and re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is on account of Type B(II), i.e., mining project which results in displacement of land owners, the benefits of rehabilitation and resettlement are as follows: "II. Type B: Mining Projects (a) Employment: Displaced and other affected families shall be eligible for employment, by the project causing displacement. For the purpose of employment, each family will nominate one member of the family. The project proponent will give preference to the nominated members of the displaced and other affected families in the matter of employment. The order of preference will be as follows: (1) Displaced families losing all land including homestead land, (ii) Displaced families losing more than 2/3rd of agricultural land and homestead land, (iii) Families losing all agricultural land but not homestead land, (iv) Displaced families losing more than 1/3rd of agricultural land and homestead land, (v) Displaced families losing only homestead land but not agricultural land, (vi) Families losing agricultural land in part but not homestead land. The Project authority will make special efforts to facilitate skill u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t habitat shall be given a one time cash grant of Rs.50,000/- in lieu of homestead land. (1) House Building Assistance: Besides, Project authority shall construct house for each displaced families in the resettlement habitat or provide house building assistance of Rs.1,50,000/- to each of the displaced family settling in the Resettlement habitat or opting for self relocation elsewhere. (g) Shops and Service Units: Project authorities will also construct shops and service units at feasible locations at their own cost, which will be allotted in consultation with Collector to project displaced families opting for selfemployment. While allotting such units, preference will be given to physically challenged persons and members of displaced SC & ST families." 40. On 05.08.2013, the State of Orissa, through a notification published in the Official Gazette, published the amendments to the R&R Policy 2006. The amendment essentially dealt with change in clause 2(f) with respect to the definition of "family". The amendments made are extracted below: "AMENDMENTS 1. In the Orissa Resettlement and Rehabilitation Policy, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e enjoyed by those who do not have a house but were residing in the area for three years prior to acquisition. In case a family in an urban area opts not to take the house offered, it will be entitled to one time compensation for house construction which will not be less than Rs.1,50,000/-. At the same time, if any affected family in rural area so prefers, the equivalent cost of house may be offered in lieu of the constructed house. The second benefit is that if jobs are created through the project which benefits from acquisition, the concerned entity should provide suitable training and skill development in the required field and make provision for employment at a rate not lower than the minimum wages to at least one member of the affected family or arrange for a job in any other project. In lieu of this benefit, a one-time benefit of Rs.5 lakhs per family is to be made or annuity policies which would be not less than Rs.2,000/- per month per family for 20 years with appropriate indexation in consumer price index for agricultural labourers has to be made. Furthermore, subsistence allowance for displaced families for a comparative one-year equivalent of Rs.3000/- per month is to be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tation." 46. The amendment to the policy, made on 05.08.2013, is that instead of a major son, the expression "A major son/grandson irrespective of his marital status" was substituted. Similarly, the term "Unmarried daughter/sister more than 30 years of age", was substituted with "Major unmarried daughter/Major unmarried granddaughter/Major unmarried sister". 47. The rival arguments in regard to these amendments were that on the one hand, the landowners urged that grandsons, apart from the original beneficiaries, were entitled to employment benefits, as were unmarried daughters, who were more than 30 years. On the other hand, MCL urged that the basic idea of rehabilitation being granting employment to one member of the displaced or affected family, the construction to be given to the policy should be in harmony with that intent, and not result in an employment bonanza, thus placing undue burdens on the MCL. 48. A proper and purposive interpretation of the policy - with respect to employment benefits and entitlements can be gathered, not only by taking note of the definition of "family" but also the operative portion, which confers benefits. The same is as follows: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....estriction has been done away with. Furthermore, to hold that the individual, one of his major sons, and one major son, would all be eligible, together, to claim employment is not the plain intendment. The structure of the definition and the clause dealing with employment clearly shows that two members of the family: i.e., the father and the son are eligible. In addition, an unmarried daughter too, would be treated as a separate unit. 50. It is therefore held that R&R Policy 2006, as amended in 2013, being more beneficial, would be applicable, subject to the above interpretation. At the same time, it is clarified that in cases where anyone has accepted employment, the issue cannot be re-opened - it shall be treated as final and binding. It is also clarified that in the event anyone among the displaced families is not interested in employment, and states so expressly, the alternative of one-time monetary payment, in terms of clause 3 of the 2006 policy, would be provided. 51. Therefore, in the light of the above discussion, it is held that though the R&R Policy 2006 as amended in 2013 is applicable, the question of the father, the son and grandson, being eligible for employmen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....;118 15 Gopalpur 1031 336 258 695 Garjanbahal 350 211 141 139 Kulda 86 61 56 25 Karlikachhar 153 12 6 141 Siarmal 188 36 22 152 Bangurkela 226 9 3 217 Total 3034 1420 1177 1614 55. The status of resettlement sites as of October 2021, according to MCL, is as follows: Sl. No Name of the resettlement site Area (in Acres) Approx plot developed Plot allotted status of site Villagers to be resettled Remarks 1 Basundhara Nagar 73.62 256 256 Tikilipara-132, Sardega-124 Already resettled 2 Barpali-I 15.94 72 68 Bankibahal Already resettled 3 Barpali-II 15.00 75 70 Garjanbahal Almost all the activities have been completed, the water supply to the R&R site has already been arranged. The site is fully ready for shifting the villagers of Garjanbahal. 4 Chhatenpali 61.95 315 158 Kulda-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... One time assistance for relocation @ Rs.50,000/-; house building allowance of Rs.1,50,000 has concededly been increased to Rs.14,50,000. The figures shown by MCL as well as the materials placed on record in the form of objections by the land owners disclose that the progress of development of lands in the sites earmarked have been dismal, to put it mildly. MCL cannot escape the share of the blame in this regard. 59. Under the R&R Act, 2013 the State and MCL are under an obligation to ensure that rehabilitation and resettlement plans are prepared in consultation with the displaced owners. The State policy is also in accordance with the Act in that regard. In the present case, according to the materials, MCL asserts that resettlement plots have been provided to 1177 displaced families and that 1614 families remain to be given that benefit. 60. Having regard to the fact that the judgment of this court was delivered in 2010 after which compensation determination and reports of the committee were prepared and submitted to this court mostly between 2010 and 2013, and further having regard to the fact that two other reports are pending consideration of this court, it would, in the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nities such as roads in the villages, appropriate drainage, provision for safe drinking water for each family, provision for drinking water for cattle, grazing land, reasonable number of fair price shops, community or panchayat ghars; village level post offices, seed-cum-fertilizer storage facilities, provision for basic irrigation facilities, transportation to the newly resided areas, burial or cremation grounds, facilities for sanitation, including individual toilet points, individual single electricity connections, anganwadi, providing child nutritional services, school, sub-health centres within two kilometre range, Primary Health Centres in terms of the Central Government norms, play grounds for children, one community centre for every 100 families, places of worship, separate land for traditional tribal institutions, etc. In addition, forest dweller families must be provided with their forest on non-timber produce close to the new places of resettlement. Furthermore, appropriate security arrangements are to be provided and service centre in accordance with the prescribed norms also has to be provided. 64. In the present case, the materials on record show that those resettl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es on the alienated land by undertaking a special drive together with land acquisition. (5) The Development Plan shall also contain a programme for development of alternate fuel, fodder and, non-timber forest produce resources on nonforest lands within a period of five years, sufficient to meet the requirements of tribal communities as well as the Scheduled Castes. (6) In case of land being acquired from members of the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes, at least one-third of the compensation amount due shall be paid to the affected families initially as first instalment and the rest shall be paid after taking over of the possession of the land. (7) The affected families of the Scheduled Tribes shall be resettled preferably in the same Scheduled Area in a compact block so that they can retain their ethnic, linguistic and cultural identity. (8) The resettlement areas predominantly inhabited by the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes shall get land, to such extent as may be decided by the appropriate Government free of cost for community and social gatherings. (9) Any alienation of tribal lands or lands belonging to members of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... SC/ST members living in the areas sought to be acquired. It also mandates that formulation of a development plan and protective provisions invalidating alienation of tribal lands or lands belonging to the SC/ST in disregard of laws and regulations as null and void. Section 42, on the other hand ensures that all benefits, including reservation benefits available to SC/ST in the affected area shall continue in the resettlement area. In this case, the land owners were displaced on account of the acquisition in favour of MCL, which is entirely involuntary. It is not in dispute that these displaced families/land owners are residents of the Fifth Schedule Areas. 67. As far as Section 41 goes, in the opinion of this court, given that the acquisition notification was issued in 1988 and finalised in 1990 and even the judgment of this court indicating the methodology for compensation determination was delivered in 2010, the question of giving extra consideration in terms of Section 41 does not arise. However, since the resettlement of the displaced families and their rehabilitation have been mandated by both provision of the R&R Act, 2013 which has application to the ongoing acquisition,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....les to the enactment specified in the Fourth Schedule, which in this case was the CBA Act. The date therefore, on which the R&R Act, 2013 is applicable from, is 28.08.2015. Additionally, the report which was finalised before that date cannot be interfered with. The land owners and displaced families residing in the villages for which reports were prepared earlier than 28.08.2015, would not therefore be entitled to the benefits of the R&R Act, 2013. Hence, the benefits of the R&R Act apply to displaced families and land owners of Kiripsira, Ratansara, Jhupuranga and Tumulia. iii. Re point no. 3, 4 and 5: a. It is held that the R&R Policy 2006 as amended by the 2013 policy applies for the purpose of employment benefits. b. A family unit would comprise of head of family or father, a major son, and an unmarried daughter having regard to the definition and the note appended thereof. In case, for some reason, the major son cannot be given employment, and there exists a major grandson, he would then be eligible for consideration. In other words, two members (father and son or father and grandson) would be eligible for employment and not three, in addition to the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eded, more than one draw of lots, whereby plots are allotted to the concerned displaced families. In case, for any reason such plot or plots cannot be handed over within two years, or are not available, the leftover families so to say would be entitled to the one-time compensation of Rs.25 lakhs with interest @ 7% per annum, for two years. v. Re point no. 7: a. The State shall ensure that all facilities and amenities are developed in accordance with the Third Schedule to the R&R Act, 2013 within three years in which plots are handed over to the displaced families or in any event within three years from the date of this judgment. The necessary funding for this purpose shall be by MCL, in addition to the State's obligation to spend its resources. b. The members of the SC/ST communities shall be entitled to the preservation and protection of their status in view of Section 42 of the R&R Act, 2013. Consequently, the concerned Collectors shall ensure that appropriate caste certificates are issued in this regard, given that land owners have been moved involuntarily and would have to migrate to other areas. vi.This court further directs that compensatio....