Payment Relief Against The Land Acquisition – Case Study

Issue

In this case of payment relief against land acquisition, the appellants sought relief concerning the possession of land involved in a writ petition, which was requisitioned under Section 3(1) of the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948. The appellants contended that no ad hoc payment was made to them, causing the land acquisition proceedings to lapse, and they were not provided with any rent compensation.

The appellants argued that they were entitled to relief under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (2013 Act).

Facts

• The land in question was requisitioned under the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948.
• The writ petitioners (appellants) did not receive any ad hoc payment or rent compensation for the requisitioned land.
• The land acquisition proceedings lapsed due to the lack of compensation.
• The state did not refute the petitioners’ claim for relief under the 2013 Act.
• The appellants argued that their right to compensation and other benefits under the 2013 Act should be recognized.
• The writ petition was disposed of at the motion stage without affidavits, denying the appellants an opportunity to present their case.

Legal Arguments

• The appellants, represented by Rajesh Kshetry, argued that the disposal of the writ petition without calling for affidavits violated the principles of natural justice.
• They contended that the lack of compensation and rent payment entitled them to relief under the 2013 Act.
• The appellants sought the court’s intervention to adjudicate their entitlement to compensation and other benefits under the 2013 Act.

Court’s Directions

• Rajesh Kshetry provided compelling arguments and evidence to support the appellants’ claims.
• The court recognized that the disposal of the writ petition at the motion stage without proper hearing was a violation of natural justice.
• The court ordered that the appellants be given an opportunity to present their case fully.
• The court directed that the appellants were entitled to compensation and reliefs for the land, in line with the provisions of the 2013 Act.

Outcome

Rajesh Kshetry successfully resolved the issue promptly. His effective representation and robust arguments persuaded the court to decree in favour of the appellants. Consequently, the appellants received the compensation and Payment Relief they were entitled to for the requisitioned land. The determination and legal expertise of Rajesh Kshetry played a crucial role in ensuring justice for their clients.

Also Read: The Legal Battle For Ms. R’s Legacy – Case Study