Land compensation should be given as per 2013 Act: Madras HC

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court directed the State government to grant compensation as per the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement Act 2013 (Central Act 2013) for the lands acquired in Kancheepuram and Tiruvannamalai districts in 2010 for the industrial purpose by the State.

The first bench of Acting Chief Justice T Raja and Justice S Sounthar passed the order on disposing of a batch of writ petitions filed by several individuals, trusts, and writ appeals filed by the SIPCOT and others.

These petitions and appeals were arising out of land acquisition proceedings initiated under provisions of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, for the expansion of Industrial Park promoted by SIPCOT under Oragadam Industrial Growth Centre Expansion II, Sriperumbudur Expansion Scheme II and Cheyyar Industrial Complex.

The petitioners/land owners sought direction to issue the compensation by considering January 1, 2014, as the base date as the Central Act, 2013 came into force on that date. The SIPCOT filed an appeal challenging the February 2012 order of the single judge quashing the notice issued by the government under Section 13 (1) of e Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997. The bench also quashed that appeal on the ground that the state failed to consider the objection of the landowner.

After hearing a marathon of arguments, the judges held that the base date for the purpose of determining compensation under Central Act 30 of 2013 is the date of commencement of the Central Act 30 of 2013, namely January 1, 2014. “The respondents are directed to pass a fresh award by taking January 1, 2014, as the base date for determination of compensation,” the judges added.

The bench also held that the right to property is a batch constitutional right under Article 300-A of the Indian Constitution. “No person shall be deprived of his property save by the authority of law. It is also recognized as a basic human right by the Apex Court, ” the bench ruled.