State of West Bengal v. Sterling Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd., (SC) BS153812
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- M.B. Shah and R.P. Sethi, JJ.

Civil Appeals Nos. 6537, 6538 and 6539-6563 of 2001 (arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos. 2552, 6554, 16514-16538 of 2001 @ C.C. Nos. 6711, 6709, 6715, 6712, 6723, 6716, 6704, 6714, 6702, 6710, 6703, 6719. 6706, 6707, 6722, 6717, 6721, 6705, 6720, 6713, 6708, 6701 and 6728 of 2001). D/d. 18.9.2001.

State of W.B. etc. - Appellants

Versus

Sterling Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. and others etc. - Respondents

Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Section 9(3A) (as inserted by W.B. Amendment Act, 1997 - W.B. Land (Acquisition and Requisition) Act, 1948, Section 3 - Acquisition of Land - Vires of Section 9(3A) of Land Acquisition Act challenged - High Court directed to return possession of requisitioned lands to owners and to pay compensation for continuing in possession even after lapse of W.B. Requisition Act, 1948 - Appeal against by State - During pendency owners sought leave to withdraw their challenge to vires of Act if reasonably compensated - State agreed for the same - Apex Court directed determination of compensation and pay the same within 2 months with interest @ 12% p.a.

[Paras 5, 6 and 7]

JUDGMENT

M.B. Shah, J. - Delay condoned.

2. Leave granted.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

4. These appeals are filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 2-1-2001 passed by the High Court of Calcutta. Before the High Court, respondents filed petitions challenging the vires of Land Acquisition (West Bengal Amendment) Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as "the Amendment Act of 1997) as well as for other reliefs. By impugned order, the appellants (respondents in the High Court) were directed to return possession of the requisitioned lands to the respondents herein and to pay compensation for Continuing in possession of the lands even after the lapse of the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 (Act 2 of 1948) at the rate of recurring compensation paid during the period of requisition till return of possession on the ground that the right of possession over the land after issuance of the order of requisition under Section 3 of the Act 2 of 1948 was not enduring in nature which could continue indefinitely even after expiry of the life of Act 2 of 1948. The Court further held that the Amendment Act of 1997 was prospective in nature and the State Government was not competent to give retrospective effect to the said Amendment Act of 1977 in order to bridge the gap between the expiry of the Act 2 of 1948 on 31-3-1997 and the commencement of Amendment Act of 1997 on 2-5-1997.

5. At the time of hearing of this matter, learned counsel for the respondents (original petitioners) sought leave to withdraw their challenge to the vires of the Act. They have submitted that the respondents would be satisfied if reasonable compensation as provided under the Act is paid within the time frame as agreed. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State, after obtaining instructions from the concerned officers, submitted that reasonable compensation under the provisions of the Act would be determined and paid.

6. Admittedly in the present case, possession of the land was taken by the authority on 14th March, 1993 under the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948 (Act 2 of 1948) (for short "the Requisition Act") and thereafter the Collector has issued notices under Section 9(3)(a) of the Land Acquisition (West Bengal Amendment) Act, 1997. Keeping these two dates in mind, the compensation is required to be determined.

7. In view of the above, we direct that

8. In view of the aforesaid directions, the impugned order passed by the High Court would not survive. The appeals are disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.

Order accordingly.