Land Acquisition – Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – Section 21 – Notice to Interested Persons – Reduction of Land Value – Procedural Compliance – Opportunity of Hearing.
2025 KER 38723 : 2025 (6) KLR 33 : 2025 KLT OnLine 2160
High Court of Kerala
Hon’ble Mr. Justice C. Jayachandran
W.P.(C) Nos. 951 and 1548 of 2025, June 3, 2025
The petitioners challenged the land acquisition proceedings under the 2013 Act, specifically the order reducing the land value by 80% due to alleged quarrying activities, without granting them an opportunity to be heard. The High Court held that Section 21 mandates a hearing for affected persons on matters impacting compensation, including land classification. The failure to provide such a hearing before issuing the impugned order (Ext.P3) rendered it illegal for being non-speaking and violative of procedural fairness. The Court distinguished Nasik Municipal Corporation v. Harbanslal Laikwant Rajpal [(1997) 4 SCC 199], noting its inapplicability to the present case where substantial prejudice was caused. Ext.P3 and subsequent awards were set aside, with directions to the District Collector to conduct fresh proceedings under Section 21, ensuring a hearing on quarrying, diminution of land value, and its extent, before passing awards under Section 23.
Held: The impugned order reducing land value by 80% without notice or hearing violated Section 21 of the 2013 Act. The District Collector was directed to provide a proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass reasoned awards, considering objections on land classification and value.
Counsel:
For Petitioners: Sri. Cibi Thomas, Smt. Swarna Thomas, Smt. Anusree K., Sri. Joby Jacob Pulickekudy, Sri. Anil George, Smt. Smitha Philipose.
For Respondents: Sri. P.U. Shailajan, Smt. Sudha Devi (Special Government Pleader, LA).
Lawyers Directory
K/108/1999 |
K/1775/2021 |
K/1064/2024 |
K/595/1991 |
K/347/1992 |
K/592/2005 |
.jpg)
K/1061/1993 |
K/50/1985 |
