Excelsior Correspondent
Srinagar, Feb 9: The High Court has dismissed and declined to enhance the compensation for Shamilat land by saying that authorities have paid compensation as per law.
The land owners were seeking quashing of the recommendations of the Committee issued vide No. 570/OQ/TA dated 04.09.2013 in its meeting in so far it relates to the payment of compensation for Shamilat land under the possession of the petitioners which they contend is beyond the limit prescribed on the basis of so-called pro-rata.
The Division Bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice M A Chowdhary said the Collector, Land Acquisition has rightly followed the law and got a requisite report from the Tehsildar concerned and thereafter disbursed the compensation to the persons entitled to Shamilat Deh land on pro-rata basis.
“This is how the compensation as per their share was also disbursed to the petitioners, who received the compensation and did not raise any objection or protest. In view of the aforesaid admitted position, we are at loss to understand as to what has made the petitioners to still pursue the petition”, the court said.
It recorded its concern as to why the petitioners are seeking enhanced rate on Shamilat land and observed that “greed has no limits”, but to satisfy insatiable greed, the process of law and the forum of courts cannot be permitted to be used.
The petitioners, court added, should feel satisfied and content with the compensation they have received for the Shamilat land to which they were entitled to as per law. Their occupation of the Shamilat land in excess of their share cannot inure to their benefit. “In view of the aforesaid, we find no merit in this petition, the same is dismissed, as such”, the court concluded.
The controversy raised in the petition was that Director, Industries and Commerce, Kashmir vide his No. JDDK/Dev/Acq-541/EWuyan3256-58 dated 04.01.2013 placed an indent with the Collector, Land Acquisition, Pulwama with a request for acquisition of land measuring 416 kanals for establishment of Industrial Estate at Khrew.
The land was notified for acquisition by the Collector, Land Acquisition by issuing notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act and out of the subject land, land measuring 239 kanals was proprietary in nature, while as, rest of the land measuring 177 kanals was partible Shamilat classified as Shamilat Section (5).
The matter was taken to the District Private Negotiation Committee for amicable settlement of the compensation. The District Private Negotiation Committee after holding consultation and deliberation with all stakeholders took a decision on 26.06.2013 and fixed a rate of Rs. 5.00 lacs per kanal to be paid to the owners and interested persons. The compensation for the proprietary land was immediately disbursed in favour of the rightful claimants i.e., recorded owners as per the revenue record.
So far as the partible Shamilat land measuring 177 kanals is concerned, the Collector, Land Acquisition, took up the matter with Tehsildar, Pampore to prepare a pro-rata report indicating the share of each land holder in the partible Shamilat land.
On the basis of report submitted by Tehsildar, the compensation at the rate determined by the Private Negotiation Committee (PNC) was paid to the rightful claimants and the grievance of the petitioners is that they were entitled to be paid the compensation for the entire Shamilat land under their occupation irrespective of their share in the Shamilat on pro-rata basis.
The petitioners claim to have purchased the Shamilat land under their occupation from a Kashmiri Pandit by way of a Sale Deed. The Collector, Land Acquisition, refused to accede to the request of the petitioners to disburse them the compensation for the entire Shamilat land under their occupation and, therefore, the petitioners approached the Court.
Court said the Collector, Land Acquisition, Pulwama could not oblige the petitioners for the reason that the law clearly provided that the land holders would be entitled to share in the partible Shamilat land on pro-rata basis i.e, proportionate to their holdings and not to the actual land under their occupation.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
