Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited v. Rameshwar Dass (Dead)
Background
Land was acquired decades ago from several villages near Manesar, Gurgaon for an industrial township, and compensation rates were fixed and revised multiple times across a long chain of litigation. In an earlier judgment (Wazir v. State of Haryana, 2019), the Supreme Court had fixed a lower final compensation rate (~Rs. 29.77 lakh/acre) specifically for landholders of three villages (Bas Khusla, Bas Haria, Dhana) than what those landholders had already been paid (~Rs. 37.40 lakh/acre) under earlier interim orders, and had directed that any excess be refunded. The landholders from these three villages filed the present applications seeking clarification/relief from having to refund the excess amount they had already received and spent.
Decision Breakdown
The Court rejected the landholders' argument that compensation could never have been reduced below what they already received, noting its earlier remand had left all compensation questions open to be decided afresh on the facts. However, it found a genuine "anomaly": these landholders had, in good faith and without any security being demanded, already received Rs. 37.40 lakh/acre under court-supervised disbursal orders, while the acquiring authority had separately recovered even larger sums from subsequent land allottees. Exercising its special "complete justice" power under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Court held that these landholders would not be required to refund the excess over their revised entitlement, modifying the refund direction from the earlier Wazir judgment to this extent, while leaving the corrected compensation rate itself (Rs. 29.77 lakh/acre) unchanged. A connected batch of related SLPs by other landholders from the same acquisition was also disposed of by applying the same ruling.
Lesson Learnt
Even after a court finally fixes compensation at a lower rate than earlier paid, the Supreme Court can use its special constitutional power (Article 142) to protect ordinary landowners who received and spent money in good faith under earlier court orders, shielding them from ruinous refund demands when equity so requires.