GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN vs KEVAL RAM DAYARAM SHAHANI and others
This petition for leave to appeal was filed by the Government of Pakistan challenging orders of the Sindh High Court, which directed the government to deposit compensation amounts for land acquired for public purposes. The core legal question was whether the High Court acted illegally or arbitrarily in directing the government to deposit the aggregate compensation amount, including interest at 6% and additional compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, after the government had previously failed to successfully challenge the main judgment. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding that the High Court’s order was just, fair, and equitable. The Court found that the High Court merely upheld the calculation of compensation and interest, which the government had not disputed. The key principle laid down is that where a High Court’s order directing the deposit of compensation is based on established calculations and statutory entitlements that the acquiring authority has not contested, such an order does not constitute an illegal or arbitrary exercise of jurisdiction warranting interference by the Supreme Court.
- Can the Supreme Court interfere with a High Court order directing the deposit of land acquisition compensation when the calculation is based on undisputed statutory entitlements?
- Is a direction by the High Court to deposit compensation for land acquired for public purposes considered arbitrary if it follows previously affirmed judgments?
- Does the award of interest and additional compensation under the Land Acquisition Act 1894 constitute a valid basis for a High Court order directing the government to deposit funds?
- Section 23(2), Land Acquisition Act 1894
ORDER
' RANA BHAGWANDAS, J.--- Petitioner-Government seeks leave to appeal against identical orders of the Sindh High Court, dated 4-11-2004 allowing respondents' miscellaneous application directing the petitioner-Government to deposit the aggregate amount calculated on the basis of compensation awarded by Land Acquisition Officer for the respondents' land acquired for public purpose.
2. We have heard Mr. Akhlaq Ahmad Siddiqui, learned Advocateon-Record for the petitioner and gone through the impugned order. It is evident from the record that the petitioner-Government had approached this Court against judgment of the High Court in the main case but without any success. Through the present order, High Court has only upheld and approved the calculation of aggregate amount and reiterated the payment of interest at the rate of 6% as well as award of additional compensation in terms of section 23(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which was not disputed by the Government. By allowing the withdrawal of amount by the land owners and directing the petitioner-Government to deposit the balance amount within three months, High Court has neither acted illegally nor arbitrarily. Order on the face of record, appears to be just, fair, and equitable which does not admit of any interference.
3. No ground is, thus, made out for the grant of leave which is declined and both the .