A view of the SC.
Credit: PTI Photo
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday directed the Maharashtra authorities to hand over "peaceful and vacant" possession of over 24 acres of an alternative land parcel to a person whose land was "illegally" occupied more than six decades ago.
The apex court also accepted the unconditional apology tendered by Rajesh Kumar, additional chief secretary of the forest and revenue department, against whom it had on August 28 issued a show cause notice asking why contempt action should not be initiated against him for "contemptuous remarks" made in an affidavit filed by the department.
The affidavit appeared to suggest that the apex court does not follow the law.
“The applicant as well as the court may not approve the fresh calculation made by the Collector, Pune (for grant of monetary compensation to the applicant) but it is the bounden duty of the state to follow the provisions of law and to arrive at a proper calculation,” the affidavit filed on behalf of Kumar said, which the court found contemptuous.
Kumar, in his affidavit, said the state was willing to offer the a sum of Rs 48.65 crore as compensation. However, the applicant insisted the market value of the land was over Rs 250 crore. The applicant then sought a substitute parcel of land as compensation.
A bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan directed the collector, Pune, to ensure that 24 acres 38 gunthas of substitute land is measured, demarcated and its "peaceful and vacant possession be handed over to the applicant".
It said if there were encroachments on the land, the same shall be removed prior to it being handed over to the applicant.
The bench accepted the undertaking filed by the state authority which stated that peaceful and vacant possession of the land would be handed over to the applicant.
During the hearing, when the issue of forest land cropped up, the bench observed, "We won't pass any order whereby the forest cover is likely to be affected".
The apex court observed that its green bench was trying to protect the green cover and trees across the country.
At the outset, advocate Nishant R Katneshwarkar, appearing for the state, told the bench that Kumar was personally present before the court and has filed an affidavit tendering an unconditional apology.
"Who had drafted that affidavit? It must have been vetted by some lawyer?" the bench asked.
Katneshwarkar told the bench that there was some kind of a "communication gap" between the lawyers and the secretary concerned, and that the affidavit was filed at the last moment.
"Lawyers can't be postmen. They are the officers of the court," the bench observed.
"We don't have any pleasure in calling the officers. As a matter of fact, I have deprecated the practice of high courts in summoning the officers in court…," Justice Gavai said.
The state's counsel said as per the apex court's August 28 order, the applicant had come to the Pune collector's office and inspected the land. "The state can allot him 24 acres 38 gunthas, the equivalent piece of land which was taken by the state in the year 1961," he said.
The bench told the applicant's counsel that if the piece of land offered was acceptable to him, then the court will take an undertaking from the authority that they will hand him the possession of the unencumbered land.
After the undertaking was filed later in the day, the bench passed the order in the matter.
It said in so far as modifications to be issued under section 37 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 was concerned, the same be done within three months.
The bench directed that all formalities for conveying the title of the land in favour of the applicant be completed within six weeks.
Regarding the show cause notice issued to the officer, the bench noted the state's counsel has submitted that various persons were involved in finalising the affidavit which was filed earlier in the court.
"We therefore accept the apology and discharge the notice issued to Rajesh Kumar," the bench said. It posted the matter for further hearing in January.
While hearing the matter on August 28, the apex court had pulled up the Maharashtra government for its "dilly-dallying" and "non-serious" approach in calculating compensation to be given to the applicant.
The top court had earlier noted that the land belonging to the applicant was illegally taken over by the state and allotted to the Armament Research Development Establishment Institute (ARDEI).
It had said despite succeeding in pursuing his case right up to the apex court, the applicant was made to run from pillar to post to get his legitimate due.
The state government had claimed that the said piece of land was occupied by ARDEI, a unit of the Centre's Defence Department.
The government had said subsequently, another piece of land was allotted to the private party in lieu of the land that was in ARDEI's possession.
However, it later transpired that the land allotted to the applicant was notified as forest land.