Sudhir Narain - (1.) THE present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of the Tahsildar Jalalabad dated 26-12-90 and order passed in revision dated 7th February 1992 by the Additional Collector, Shahjahanpur in a proceeding under Sec. 122-B of U. P. Z A and L R. Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act),
(2.) A notice in form 49-Ka was issued to the petitioner in pursuance of the proceeding under Sec. 122-B of the Act in which it was stated that the petitioners illegally occupied plot nos. 249/0.118, 250/00.44 situated in Village Rustampur Chak, P.O Jaladabad, Distr. Shahjahanpur. The petitioners filed their objection and they pleaded that they ate in possession of the disputed plot for last 10 years and as such they are entitled to get benefit of the provision of Section 122-B (4-F) of the Act It was alleged by the petitioners that they are landless agricultural labourers and have less than 12 Bighas of land and they are in occupation of the land since the year 1985 and they are entitled to the benefit of the said provision The Tehsildar. the respondent no. 1 did not accept the contention of the petitioner and recorded a finding that they were not in possession of the land since before the year 1985. as such they are not entitled to the benefit of Sec. 122-B (4-F) of the Act. Their possession was unauthorised for last one year. The respondent no. I directed for ejectment of the petitioners and further imposed damages of Rs. 4:5,000/- against them. The petitioners being aggrieved by the said order filed a revision before the Additional Collector, Shahjahanpur The revision was dismissed by the Additional Collector, Shahjahanpur by order dated 7th February, 1992. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that they are not challenging the order of ejectment and they have already delivered possession of the land in question to the Gaon Sabha He has confined his argument only against the order awarding damage. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that quantum of damage has been fixed without indicating the principle on which be has fixed the amount of damages. Plot No 249 area 0.118 is recorded as Khalihan and plot no. 250 area 0 44 acres is reserved for Panchayatghar. The Tahsildar found that the petitioner was in unauthorised possession only for one year The damages to the extent of Ks 45000/- was not based on any principles. The Tahsildar relied upon Kharsa 1391-F which indicated that the petitioners have cultivated the land in the said area. The land was used for agricultural purposes by the petitioner. Sub-section 2 of Section 122-B of the Act provides that if a person has damaged or mis-appropriated or any person is in occupation of the land in contravention of the provisions of the Act, the Asstt. Collector shall issue notice to the person concerned to show cause why compensation for damage, misappropriation for wrongful occupation be not recovered from him. It reads as under :- "Wherefrom the information received under sub-section (1) or otherwise, the Asstt. Collector Is satisfied that any property referred to in subsection (1) has been damaged or mis-appropriated or any person is in occupation of any land, referred to in that sub-section, in contravention of the provisions of this Act, he shall issue notice to the person concerned to show cause why compensation for damage, mis-appropriation or wrongful occupation, as mentioned in such notice be not recovered from him or, as the case may be, why he should not be evicted from such land".
(3.) THE above noted provisions clearly indicates that the Asstt. Collector can only direct for payment of Compensation. In case the property of the Gaon Sabha has been damaged or mis-appropriated the compensation will be to the extent of the value of such properly. In case there is a wrongful occupation compensation will be awarded to the extent of Joss suffered by the Gaon Sabha on account of such wrongful occupation THE word 'compensation' according to Oxford Dictionary signifies that which is given in recompense, an equivalent rendered ; damages, on the other hand, constitute the sum of money claimed or adjudged to be paid in compensation for loss or injury sustained, the value estimated In money of something lost or withheld. THE court in Mohammad Mozaharal Abad v. Moahmed Azimaddin Bhuniy1923 Cal. 507, while considering the word compensation has observed : "THE word compensation as pointed out in the Oxford dictionary, signifies that which is given in recompense, and equivalent rendered. Damages, on the other hand; constitute the sum of money claimed or adjudged to be paid in compensation for loss or injury sustained, the valve extimated in money, of something lost or withheld. THE term compensation etymologically suggests the image of balancing one thing against another; its primary signification is equivalence, and the secondary and more common meaning is the something given or obtained as an equivalent." The State Government framed the rules for determining the amount of such compensation when a person is in such wrongful occupation Rule 115-F (2) (as amended) provides as under :- Rule 115-F (1).......... (2) If the damage or loss caused through mis-appropriation is of such a nature as is not capable of being repaired or made good, (as in the case of cutting of trees, or grazing or plants or grass). The Collector shall assess the amount of damages or loss In terms of money at the prevailing market rate in the locality. In case of wrongful occupation of land, the damage caused to the Gaon Sabha or the local authority, as the case may be, shall be assessed for each year of such wrongful occupation or any part thereof, at 100 times the amount of rent computed at the sanctioned heriditary rates applicable to the plots concerned." ;