NEW DELHI, Mar 24 : After a nearly 30-year legal battle, a group of private landowners were on Monday granted Rs 70 lakh as compensation by the Supreme Court from the Andhra Pradesh government for dispossessing them of their over 3.34 acres of land in Kurnool district.
Observing that “the purpose of law is the advancement of justice”, the top court was critical of the non-serious approach of state authorities in responding to the legal notices issued to them by private persons in land disputes.
The court said it could have directed the state authorities to put the appellants back in possession of the land but it was too late in the day to pass such a decree because the construction was completed 30 years back.
“The least that was required in the present case was for the state authorities to acknowledge the notice issued by the appellants herein and inform them as regards their stance.
“We make it abundantly clear that the public authorities must take statutory notice issued to them in all seriousness. The public authorities must not sit over such notices and force the citizens to the vagaries of litigation,” said a bench comprising Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan.
The judgement came from the bench on a long-standing land dispute between Yerikala Sunkalamma and others (appellants) and the state of Andhra Pradesh.
The appellants claimed that in 1995, they were unlawfully dispossessed from their land without any prior notice by the state authorities and a civil lawsuit was filed in 1996 at a lower court seeking a declaration of their title over the land.
The trial court decreed the suit in favour of private landowners declaring them to be the lawful owners and asked the state government to deliver the possession back to them.
However, the Andhra Pradesh government challenged this ruling in the High Court at Hyderabad, which set aside the trial court’s order in 2014, citing the appellants’ failure to prove their title and asserting that the land was government-assigned property.
Following this, the appellants approached the top court which reviewed the matter extensively.
The apex court criticised the state authorities for failing to communicate their stance in response to statutory notices issued by the appellants.
Writing a 95-page judgement for the bench, Justice Pardiwala, emphasised that public authorities must not force citizens into prolonged litigation by ignoring statutory notices.
The bench acknowledged the appellants’ claim over the land. However, it said that restoration was unfeasible given that construction on the disputed land had been completed nearly three decades ago and directed the state government to compensate the appellants monetarily instead.
“Having regard to the nature of the land, the area in question, and the prolonged litigation, we believe that the State should pay an amount of Rs 70 lakhs as compensation,” it said, adding that the amount be paid in three months from the date of the verdict.
The top court, in its verdict, referred to earlier judgement and said, “Suits for declaration of title against the government differ from suits against private parties on two counts …First, there is a presumption in favour of the Government in such suits, as all lands which are unoccupied or not vested in any individual or local authority, are presumed to belong exclusively to the Government.
“Secondly, there is an additional burden of proof on the party seeking the declaration of title against the Government. The plaintiff has to establish its possession over the land in question for a period of thirty years as opposed to twelve years in the case of adverse possession against a private party…”.
Coming down heavily on state authorities for delayed responses to private parties’ notices in land disputes, the bench said, “The public authorities must not sit over such notices and force the citizens to the vagaries of litigation. They are expected to let the plaintiff know their stand within the statutory period or in any case before he embarks upon the litigation.”
The bench said it should have allowed the appeal and decreed the suit in favour of the private parties.
“We could have directed the statea authorities to put the appellants back in possession. However, it is too late in the day to pass such a decree as it is going to be extremely difficult to give effect to such a decree.
“The construction was completed almost thirty years back. It would be too much for this Court to ask the state authorities to demolish that part of the construction made over the suit land. In such circumstances, we have reached the conclusion that the State must be asked to compensate the appellants in terms of money,” it said.
The bench directed its registry to circulate copies of the judgment to all the High Courts across the country and one copy each to all the Chief Secretaries of the respective State Governments with more emphasis on the notices sent to them under the Civil Procedure Code. (PTI)
Follow our WhatsApp channel
