APARESH KUMAR SINGH,J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) In the first four cases i.e. W.P.C. No. 5749 of 2012, W.P.C. No. 5732 of 2012 , W.P.C. No. 8041 of 2012 and W.P.C. No. 1719 of 2013, the acquisition proceedings invoking the emergency clause under the Act of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, undertaken for the purpose of the Respondent Company, Usha Martin Limited (UML) were under challenge by the petitioners who are land owners/society of land owners of 7 such villages comprising total area of 1217.5030 Acres. By the interim order passed during the pendency of the writ application and L.P.A. No. 114 of 2014 and analogous cases, status quo qua the possession was ordered to be maintained. The possession of the rayati land under acquisition were therefore not taken by the State nor delivered to the Company. The matters remained pending thereafter. It is also worthwhile to mention here that these acquisitions were being undertaken at the request of the Respondent-UML, which had been allotted Kathautia Coal Block Mines by the Ministry of Coal, Government of India on 29.9.2003. The Respondent UML claims to have also deposited Rs. 24 Crores 75 Lakhs and odd towards 80% of the estimated cost with the District Land Acquisition Officer, Palamau for invoking the emergency clause. A total amount of Rs. 105.44 Crores was deposited with the District Land Acquisition Officer, Palamau by the UML towards the acquisition. As a result of the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Manohar Lal Sharma v. Principal Secretary and others in Writ Petition (Crl.) No.120 of 2012 reported in (2014) 9 SCC 516 and (2014) 9 SCC 614 , coal block of several such allottees including the petitioners were cancelled. The coal blocks were made open for allotment through auction route. On 1.4.2015 it was allotted to M/s. Hindalco Industries Limited (HIL). The Respondent, UML therefore had no stake in the acquisition except seeking refund of the amount deposited towards acquisition.
(3.) Learned counsel for the Respondent UML submits that in case of refund upon de-notification of the acquisition, it would also be entitled to claim interest thereupon.;