w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Veena Singh v/s Union of India, through the Secretary Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, New Delhi & Others


Company & Directors' Information:- TRANSPORT CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED [Active] CIN = L70109TG1995PLC019116

Company & Directors' Information:- A S TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U60222TN1981PTC008886

Company & Directors' Information:- B K B TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U50300JH1990PTC004226

Company & Directors' Information:- UNION TRANSPORT (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Not available for efiling] CIN = U60231TN1993PTC026208

Company & Directors' Information:- M Y TRANSPORT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U63090UP2002PTC026917

Company & Directors' Information:- V K TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U22219GJ1997PTC032421

Company & Directors' Information:- G S TRANSPORT PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U63090WB1989PTC047780

Company & Directors' Information:- G B TRANSPORT (INDIA) PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U63090WB1979PTC032170

Company & Directors' Information:- V A TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U45202WB1996PTC081673

Company & Directors' Information:- J N SINGH TRANSPORT CO PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U60200WB2008PTC124859

Company & Directors' Information:- HIGHWAYS TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U63090TN1991PTC021106

Company & Directors' Information:- H R T TRANSPORT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U63031DL1999PTC102593

Company & Directors' Information:- G M TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U60100MH1994PTC076183

Company & Directors' Information:- G L TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U60200CH2010PTC032269

Company & Directors' Information:- R AND P TRANSPORT CO. PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U60231OR2006PTC027280

Company & Directors' Information:- R AND P TRANSPORT CO. PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U60231DL2006PTC149707

Company & Directors' Information:- V. N. TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U63090DL2004PTC125632

Company & Directors' Information:- ROAD TRANSPORT COMPANY OF INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U63090MH1995PTC094077

Company & Directors' Information:- C AND M TRANSPORT P LTD [Active] CIN = U60300MH1994PTC078458

Company & Directors' Information:- G R C TRANSPORT COMPANY PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U63090WB1988PTC044164

Company & Directors' Information:- E C TRANSPORT LTD [Active] CIN = U63090WB1987PLC043252

Company & Directors' Information:- D G R TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U60231TZ2010PTC016521

Company & Directors' Information:- P T TRANSPORT PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U63090WB1989PTC046423

Company & Directors' Information:- TRANSPORT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U60230OR2007PTC009590

Company & Directors' Information:- C R TRANSPORT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U63090DL2002PTC115826

Company & Directors' Information:- A P M TRANSPORT COMPANY LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U60231KL1998PLC012555

Company & Directors' Information:- T. G. TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U02710CT2004PTC017051

Company & Directors' Information:- J. T. TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U63031WB2007PTC112457

Company & Directors' Information:- R S R TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U60210TZ1961PTC000392

Company & Directors' Information:- DELHI U P M P TRANSPORT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U60221DL1996PTC075242

Company & Directors' Information:- A & A TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U63010TN2008PTC070171

Company & Directors' Information:- S P TRANSPORT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1994PTC059085

Company & Directors' Information:- A B TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U60221RJ2000PTC016701

Company & Directors' Information:- G. G. TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U60210AS2008PTC008576

Company & Directors' Information:- A P K TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U60221TN2005PTC058057

Company & Directors' Information:- S P S TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U63090WB1997PTC085564

Company & Directors' Information:- TRANSPORT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U60210TN1938PTC003051

Company & Directors' Information:- A G L TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U63090TN2005PTC056306

Company & Directors' Information:- W M TRANSPORT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U60210DL2001PTC113547

Company & Directors' Information:- B V M TRANSPORT CO. PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U00739KA1998PTC024103

Company & Directors' Information:- A O TRANSPORT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U99999MH1960PTC011783

Company & Directors' Information:- NEW INDIA TRANSPORT CO PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U60221DL1944PTC000751

Company & Directors' Information:- M R TRANSPORT COMPANY PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U63090WB1987PTC042118

Company & Directors' Information:- P P TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U63090DL2003PTC119167

Company & Directors' Information:- D D J TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U60210PB1996PTC019190

Company & Directors' Information:- M M TRANSPORT PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U60231PB1979PTC004031

Company & Directors' Information:- J P TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U60231PB1997PTC019652

Company & Directors' Information:- N P TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U63090OR2012PTC015128

Company & Directors' Information:- A N G TRANSPORT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U60300MH2013PTC246013

Company & Directors' Information:- L M A TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U63090MH2002PTC135727

Company & Directors' Information:- K. G. N. TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999MH2017PTC301073

Company & Directors' Information:- B S TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U63040TG2015PTC097190

Company & Directors' Information:- K AND A TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U60200HP2010PTC031455

Company & Directors' Information:- K. C. TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U63030JK2017PTC009897

Company & Directors' Information:- S N TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Under Process of Striking Off] CIN = U60200DL2014PTC264029

Company & Directors' Information:- R J TRANSPORT COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U63010DL2013PTC248305

Company & Directors' Information:- S. K. T. TRANSPORT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U60230MP2012PTC028886

Company & Directors' Information:- S. SINGH AND COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51100MP2010PTC025020

Company & Directors' Information:- D C V TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U60210TZ1960PTC000375

Company & Directors' Information:- SINGH AND CO PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U36101PB1982PTC005152

Company & Directors' Information:- P V E TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U60210TN1961PTC004682

Company & Directors' Information:- THE TRANSPORT COMPANY LIMITED [Dissolved] CIN = U99999MH1940PLC010301

Company & Directors' Information:- VEENA LIMITED [Dissolved] CIN = U99999MH1955PLC009644

Company & Directors' Information:- J N SINGH AND CO PRIVATE LIMITED [Under Liquidation] CIN = U74999DL1908PTC000014

    Writ Appeal No. 464 of 2020

    Decided On, 11 January 2021

    At, High Court of Chhattisgarh

    By, THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTH PRATEEM SAHU

    For the Appellant: Sushobhit Singh, Advocate. For the Respondents: R1, Tushardhar Diwan, Advocate appears on behalf of Ramakant Mishra, Assistant Solicitor General, Vikram Sharma, Deputy Govt. Advocate.



Judgment Text

P.R. Ramachandra Menon, C.J.,1. Dismissal of the writ petition filed by the Appellant for granting enhanced compensation, pursuant to acquisition of land, based on the award passed more than 2 years ago made the Appellant to file this appeal. Contention is that the award passed by the Authorities is quite mechanical merely with reference to the market value fixed by the Authorities for fixing the stamp value which does not reflect the actual market value.2. Heard Shri Sushobhit Singh, the learned counsel appearing for the Appellant, Shri Tushardhar Diwan, the learned counsel for Respondent No.1 and Shri Vikram Sharma, the learned Deputy Government Advocate for the State.3. The summary of the factual matrix is that, the property belonging to the Appellant was acquired for the construction of 'National Highways' and an award was passed on 01.07.2018, based on the relevant norms. The compensation was calculated, reckoning a higher rate in respect of smaller extents and a lower rate fixed for the larger extents, based on the value fixed by the Authorities for computing the compensation. There is no dispute to the fact that the amount due under the award has already been satisfied.4. It is the case of the Appellant that, she came across Annexure A/3 judgment passed by this Court later on 06.12.2019 declaring that the value fixed by the Authorities concerned for computation of stamp duty need not reflect the actual market value (paragraph 28). The various points/questions raised in the opening paragraph of the said verdict were answered and the award passed by the Departmental Authorities and the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge were set aside directing the Competent Authority to rework the compensation payable to the Appellants with reference to the undisputed facts like the nature and credentials of the property as compared to other similar lands, though of smaller extent and fix it by separate slabs with reference to different rates for different extents and add them together and grant all consequential benefits within the time as stipulated therein. Contention is that the Appellant is also entitled to get similar relief as prayed for in the writ petition. The prayers in the writ were to the following effect:“10.1. That, this Hon'ble may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order, direction and quash the impugned award dated 1.07.2018 (Annexure P/1) so far as a relates to the lands of the petitioner.10.2. That the respondents may be directed to redetermine the compensation and market value as per the principles laid down by the Honourable Court in the Division Bench judgment in Writ Appeal No. 07 of 2019 Ashutosh Agrawal Versus Union of India dated 6.12.2019.10.3. That, this Hon'ble may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order, direction, directing the respondents to determine the market value afresh strictly in accordance RFCTLARR Act 2013 relating to market value by taking into account all the relevant factors such as area, locality and the petitioner may be further granted the benefits of interest solatium and other factors.10.4. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to grant the benefit of multiplication factor of TWO for rural areas as per Section 26(2) r/w Schedule-1 of the RFCTLRR Act, 2013.10.5. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief as it may deems fit and appropriate.”5. The grievance of the Appellant/writ Petitioner was considered by the learned Single Judge who observed that the claimant had approached the Court virtually after 2 years and 3 months of passing the award on 01.07.2018; by virtue of which there was an inordinate delay. It was also observed that there was no grievance for the Appellant/writ Petitioner at any point of time with regard to the fixation of the compensation and the award passed by the Authorities concerned. The learned Single Judge observed that various remedies were available to the Appellant/writ Petitioner and if she was not satisfied of the quantum of compensation ordered she could have invoked the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act, 2013'), which was a complete code by itself providing a mechanism for determining the compensation and remedies available to a person who is not satisfied with the award. It has been noted in the paragraph 5 of the said verdict that, it was open for the Appellant/writ Petitioner to have approached the Collector and sought for a reference in terms of the Section 64 of the Act, 2013, which was not pursued by the Appellant/writ Petitioner. It was further observed in paragraph 6 that, it was still open for the Appellant/writ Petitioner to have availed the remedy in terms of Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956, by moving an application to the 'Arbitrator' appointed by the Central Government to determine proper compensation. Observing that the Appellant/writ Petitioner had accepted the compensation without any protest and hence could not turn around after 27 months, interference was declined holding that she cannot pursue the matter merely on the basis of a judgment passed in another case, in the absence of any subsisting dispute.6. The learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the learned Single was not correct in non-suiting the Appellant merely with reference to delay and seeks to place reliance on the verdict passed by the Apex Court in Vidya Devi vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Others reported in AIR 2020 SC 4709.7. We have gone through the judgment sought to be relied on by the learned counsel for the Appellant. It is seen that it was in respect of a case, where the Appellant widow, who is an illiterate person coming from a rural area, was deprived of her private property by the State without resorting to the procedure prescribed by the law. In fact, the Appellant therein was divested of her right to property without being paid any compensation whatsoever for over half a century and hence the cause of action therein was a continuing one. Further, it was admitted by the State that the land was taken over without initiating any acquisition proceedings and any procedure known to law, which made the Apex Court to observe that delay in latches cannot be raised in such circumstances involving 'continuing cause of action' or in the circumstance sought the judicial consensus of the Court. It was accordingly that the extraordinary jurisdiction of the Apex Court under Article 136 read with Article 142 of the Constitution was exercised and the State was directed to pay compensation to the Appellant.8. The above case does come to the rescue of the Appellant herein. Firstly, for the reason that the property of the Appellant herein was acquired strictly in accordance with the relevant provisions of law. Secondly, after passing the Award, admittedly, no protest of any nature was raised by the Appellant with regard to the quantum of compensation payable for the land in question. Thirdly, no reference was ever sought to be made in terms of the Act, 2013, nor was there any move by filing an application before the Arbitrator under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 as observed by the learned Single in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the judgment. In view of the undisputed facts, the Appellant cannot equate herself to be treated on far with the Appellant before the Apex Court in Vidya Devi's case (supra). That apart, the direction given by the Apex Court in the said case is obviously in exercise of the power under 'Article 142' of the Constitution of India, which does not get any binding/presidential value under Article 141 of the Constitution of India.9. The challenge now raised as to the quantum of compensation awarded is based on the market value of the property to be computed as held by this Court in Annexure A/3 verdict dated 06.12.2019. The contention of the Appellant that the value fixed by the Authorities concerned for fixing the stamp value of the property in respect of transactions of the property is not the actual market value, which actually depends on various circumstances is a law as declared by this Court in Annexure A/3 judgment dated 06.12.2019, the benefit of which is sought to be extended to the Appellant as well.10. The learned counsel of the Appellant, however, concedes that, it is the same law declared by the Apex Court in Union of India vs. Savitri Devi & Another reported in AIR 2017 SC 5834. Since the law already stood declared by the Apex Court even on the date of passing of Award in the instant case on 01.07.2018, the Appellant cannot successfully contend that she was not aware of the law/situation, as ignorance of law is of n

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

o excuse. Virtually, the compensation awarded by the Authorities concerned was accepted without demur and the Appellant has sought to approach this Court by way of some revelation only after an inordinate delay of 2 years and 3 months. The matter already settled cannot be unsettled, which is the law declared by the Apex Court in Bhoop Singh vs. Union of India & Others reported in AIR 1992 SC 1414. It has been made clear by the Apex Court that a person who was sleeping on arm chair unmindful of his rights and liberties, if any, cannot be extended any relief from the Court as held in Rabindra Nath Bose & Others vs. Union of India & Others reported in AIR 1970 SC 470.11. In the above context, we are of the firm view that the interference declined by the learned Single Judge is quite proper in all respects and the said verdict is not assailable under any circumstance. No tenable grounds have been raised to entertain this appeal. It is dismissed accordingly.
O R