PETITIONER:
MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, KHURAI
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITI, KHURAI AND OTHERS
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 06/08/1998
BENCH:
A.S. ANAND, B.K. KIRPAL, V.N. KHARE
ACT
HEADNOTE
JUDGMENT
ORDER
This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur dated 8th January, 1995.
The only question for consideration is whether the respondent/market Comittee was liable to pay any compensation to the Municipal Council for the land comprising in Khasra No. 412/2, which was transferred by the Municipal Council to the Market Committee, since that land was earlier also being used for the purpose of the market Committee by the Municipal Council.
The land in question is located in Khasra No.412/2 and measures about 7 acres. It was acquired by the Municipal council under a gift from Seth Mohan Lan for a public purpose, namely - to establish a grain market in the year 1912. This land, alongwith some other land and buildings was transferred to the Market Committee. Appellant demanded compensation for the land and buildings. The Market committee challenged the demand through a writ petition. The writ petition was allowed and the case remanded to the Collector for determination of compensation. The Collector determined compensation for the land and buildings including the land comprising in Khasra No. 412/2. The order of the Collector was successfully challenged by the Market Committee through a writ petition in the High Court.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the record.
Section 100(1) (g) of the Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961 reads thus:-
100. Property vested in Council -
(1) Subject to any special
reservation made or to any special
conditions imposed by the State
Government, all property of the
nature hereinafter in this section
specified within the limits of the
Municipality, shall vest in and be
under the control of the Council
and with all other property which
has already vested, or may
hereafter vest in the Councils
shall be held and applied by it as
trustees for the purposes of this
Act, this is to say -
(g) all lands and/or other property
transferred to the Council by the
state Government or acquired by
gift, purchase or otherwise, for
public purpose."
Since, the land in question had been transferred to the Council by way of a gift for a public purpose, that land would be deemed to have vested in the council by virtue of the aforesaid provisions of Section 100 of the Madhya Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1961.
Section 14(1) and (2) of the Madhya Pradesh Agricultural Produce markets Act, 1960 read thus :-
14. Vesting of the property of
local authority in the market
committee - (1) The Market
committee may require a local
authority to transfer any land or
building belonging to the local
authority, which is situated within
the market yard and which
immediately before the
establishment of the market was
being used by the local authority
for the purposes of the market, and
the local authority shall, within
one month of the receipt of the
requisition, transfer, the land or
building, as the case may be, to
the market committee on such terms
as may be agreed upon between them.
(2) Where within a period of thirty
days from the date of receipt of
requisition by the local authority
under sub-section (1) no agreement
is reached between the local
authority and the market committee
under the said sub-section, the
land or building required by the
market committee shall vest in the
committee for the purposes of this
Act and the local authority shall
be paid such compensation as may be
determined by the Collector under
sub-section (4) :
Provided that no compensation shall
be payable to a local authority in
respect of any land to a local
authority in vested in it by virtue
of the provisions contained in the
enactment relating to the
constitution of such local
authority without payment of any
amount whatsoever for such vesting;
Provided further that any party
aggrieved by the order of the
Collector may, within thirty days
from the date of such order, appeal
to the State Government."
A plain reading of the first proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 14 of the 1960 Act shows that no compensation is required to be paid to the local authority for transfer of any land or building which had vested in that local authority, by virtue of the provisions contained in the enactment relating to the constitution of that local authority, without payment of any amount whatsoever for such vesting. The land comprising in Khasra No.412/2 was given as a gift to the local authority i.e. Municipal Council for a public purpose by operation of the provisions of Section 100(1) (g) of the Municipalities Act (supra) and the same vested in the Council under the enactment constituting the local authority. Under the proviso to Section 14(2) of the 1960 Act, the Municipal Council was not entitled to receive any compensation for transfer of such land to the Market Committee. It is not disputed that immediately before the establishment of the Market Committee, that very land was being used by the local authority for the purposes of the market. This being the fact situation, bot on facts and in law, the High Court was perfectly justified in holding that since the land comprising in Khasra No.412/2 had vested in the appellant, it would not be entitled to receive any compensation, since no amount had been spent by the appellant for acquisition of that land, which had been gifted to it for a public purpose. The judgment of the High Court thus calls for no interference. This appeal consequently fails and is dismissed. No costs.