Summary
Exercising Article 142 in the particular acquisition history, the Supreme Court relieved landholders in Bas Khusla, Bas Haria and Dhana from returning compensation already received at Rs37,40,000 per acre, while retaining their adjudicated entitlement of Rs29,77,333 per acre. Earlier remand directions had not guaranteed a minimum valuation. The exceptional protection reflected court-directed payments without security, elapsed time and recovery of the burden from later allottees, who gained no refund right solely from this order.
Issues
- Whether earlier remand and payment directions prevented reduction of the compensation valuation.
- Whether the landholders should nevertheless be excused from returning amounts already received.
Provisions considered
- Article 142, Constitution of IndiaExceptional relief against recovery preserved the final valuation while modifying only the obligation to return the specified excess payments. (¶ 8-12)
Held
- The earlier UDAL remand left all points open for fresh decision. HSIIDC’s appeals therefore could result in reduced compensation where the evidence justified it; the payment direction did not establish an irreducible entitlement of Rs37,40,000 per acre. (¶ 7)
- Payments had been made under this Court’s directions without security. Recovery after the elapsed period would require revenue proceedings against landholders and corresponding adjustment for later allottees; the authorities had already passed on and recovered the compensation burden from those allottees. These combined circumstances justified Article 142 relief. (¶ 8-11)
- The adjudicated rate of Rs29,77,333 per acre for the three villages remained unchanged. Landholders who had received compensation at Rs37,40,000 per acre in the stated circumstances need not return the excess; Wazir’s recovery direction was modified only to that extent. Subsequent allottees could not maintain refund proceedings solely because of this order. (¶ 12)
- In the connected delayed special leave petitions, delay was condoned and Wazir, as explained by this order, was made applicable to all concerned village landholders under the acquisition. The Court did not reopen the valuation merits. (¶ Connected order 1-5)
Result
Applications allowed to the stated extent; excess recovery waived without changing the valuation, and no consequent refund action for allottees solely on this basis. Connected SLPs disposed of under the same governing directions. No costs on the applications.