Court Rules Against Treating Licensed Occupants as Encroachers, Orders Re-evaluation of Compensation
In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court has directed the District Collector, Ernakulam to reassess the compensation awarded to Laiju M.S, whose business was displaced due to the Kochi Metro Rail Project. The judgment comes in response to a writ petition filed by Laiju M.S, challenging the inadequate compensation of Rs. 30,000, which was initially granted by treating him as an encroacher on government land.
The petitioner, Laiju M.S, had been running a bunk shop at Champakkara junction since 1970, a business initiated by his late father. The shop's location on puramboke land was legally sanctioned through licenses issued by the Cochin Corporation, making it the family's primary livelihood source. Despite holding valid licenses and paying ground rent, Laiju M.S was categorized as an encroacher, thereby limiting the compensation for his displacement to a mere Rs. 30,000.
Justice Viju Abraham, presiding over the case, emphasized that the petitioner, occupying the land under a valid license, cannot be considered an encroacher. The court noted that previous judgments had already established this stance, thus invalidating the approach taken by the authorities in Ext.P18 order.
The High Court underscored the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, and the Government Order dated 29.12.2017. These statutes ensure fair compensation for individuals displaced due to development projects, irrespective of whether the land is acquired or government-owned.
Laiju M.S had earlier pointed out discrepancies in compensation, highlighting cases where similarly placed individuals received up to Rs. 6,67,367 as rehabilitation compensation. The court acknowledged these inconsistencies and directed the authorities to provide compensation commensurate with government notifications and without treating the petitioner as an encroacher.
The ruling mandates the District Collector to reconsider the compensation package in light of the statutory provisions and the Government Order, ensuring that the benefits are aligned with those provided to similarly affected individuals. The decision is to be made within two months, with disbursement following within another month.
This judgment marks a crucial step in safeguarding the rights of individuals legally occupying government land, emphasizing the need for equitable treatment and compensation during displacement for public development projects.
Bottom line:-
A person occupying Government land under a valid licence and paying ground rent cannot be treated as an encroacher, and is entitled to compensation or benefits under the rehabilitation package when displaced for public development projects.
Statutory provision(s): Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013
Laiju M.S v. District Collector, Ernakulam, (Kerala) : Law Finder Doc id # 2892962
