The concluding portion of the referred impugned judgment makes your question clear with clarity on the referred subject, the same is reproduced below for your inflammation:
According to said agreement arrived at, only 50% of the amount of the development or betterment charges were to be realized from such farmers whose land were acquired and was subject matter of these proceedings. He further submits that this issue which has been raised in Writ Petition No. 746 of 2017, has to be answered by filing an affidavit therein.
The question before us is as to whether the petitioners are liable to pay any development or betterment charges that is sought to be imposed on the petitioners in terms of the allotment letter dated 29.06.2016 or not.
Prima facie, we find that the judgments of the High Court and that of the Apex Court do not refer to any issue relating to imposition of betterment or development charges or otherwise it's exemption but the words used in both the judgments are to the effect that the petitioners would be entitled for allotment of developed abadi plots to the extent of 10% of their acquired land subject to maximum of 2500 square meters. The Apex Court in paragraph 46 of the judgment in the case of Savitri Devi (supra) has held that the High Court has considered the ground realities of the matter and has arrived at a more practical and workable solution by adequately compensating the landowners in the form of compensation as well as allotment of developed abadi land. In paragraph 48.2 of the said judgment, the Apex Court has indicated that the benefit that has been accorded to the landowners would include the directions for allotment of developed abadi land to the extent of 10% of the land acquired of each of the landowners.
Thus, the words used in the judgment are to the effect that developed abadi land has to be allotted to the landowners but it is a settled principle of law that a judgment has not to be read like statute. The judgment therefore has to be construed in the light of the background of the controversy and the intention of adequately compensating the farmers by giving the said benefit of allotment of 10% of their land as developed abadi plots.
If there were negotiations as contended by the Development Authority on 24.4.2013 and the rate of development charges was reduced to 50% in such cases, then in that event it will have to be further seen as to whether such agreement had been entered into and whether it is binding between the parties or not.
Thirdly, there is yet another class of landowners whose land has been acquired and who have already been extended benefits to the extent of 6 to 10 % which is being adjusted as has been observed by the Full Bench of the High Court, and in the event any such allotment has preceded earlier then whether any such terms and conditions of realizing settlement/development charges had been imposed or not, and to what extent had that been accepted by the landowners.
The respondent Development Authority will therefore, specifically respond by filing an appropriate affidavit about the aforesaid facts as also whether any such decision was communicated to the farmers about the imposition of betterment charges after the judgment of the High Court dated 21.10.2011, and whether such an issue had been contested between the parties before the Apex Court or not. .