The Allahabad High Court has delivered a sharp rebuke to the Uttar Pradesh government for its "mal-administration" in a land compensation case that has dragged on for nearly five decades. The court has given the state's Chief Secretary and other top officers a final one-month ultimatum to comply with its orders, failing which they will face personal contempt charges.
A 48-Year Ordeal for a Landowner
The bench of Justice Salil Kumar Rai was hearing a contempt application filed by Vinay Kumar Singh. His struggle began when three of his plots in Bhairopur village, Handia area of Prayagraj, were acquired by the state government through notifications published in July and October 1977.
The awards for compensation were declared in February and August 1982. However, Singh never received the payment. The court noted that the plots, initially acquired for the Irrigation Department, were later transferred to the Urban Development Department for the Shri Kanshiram Ji Shahri Garib Awas Yojana, but remained unutilized.
Court Condemns 'Shuttlecock' Treatment
In a strongly-worded observation, Justice Rai condemned the government's conduct. "It is a matter between two departments as to which department is liable to pay compensation… the applicant cannot be made… a shuttlecock by two departments and thrown… [from] one department to another for compensation," the court stated.
The bench further emphasized that such behavior reflects mal-administration on the part of the state government. It clarified that the land, once acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, vests with the State, making the State primarily liable for compensation.
Ultimatum to the Highest Officers
The court has directed the Uttar Pradesh Chief Secretary, the heads of the Irrigation and Urban Development departments, and the Prayagraj District Magistrate to file affidavits within one month showing full compliance of a 2016 High Court order.
The order, dated July 27, 2016, had ruled that the acquisition proceedings for Singh's land had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The court had quashed contrary orders and allowed Singh's writ petition.
The High Court made it clear that in case of any confusion within the administrative machinery, the highest officer of the State would be held responsible. "Any order to an officer of the State is an order to the State itself," the bench observed, holding the Chief Secretary liable for contempt if the order is not complied with.
The court found that the state officers had knowingly and willfully disobeyed its orders, calling the non-compliance "intentional, conscious, calculated and a deliberate act." It noted that even after the Supreme Court dismissed the state's Special Leave Petition against the 2016 order, and despite the HC granting additional time in February 2017, the authorities failed to act, forcing Singh to file the present contempt application on May 27, 2017.
If the affidavits showing compliance are not filed within the stipulated one month, the court has ordered all the concerned officers to be personally present in court to face the framing of contempt charges.
