Disposed

Johur Ali v. Union of India and Ors.

Calcutta HC8 Aug 2022WPA/150/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition by landowner seeking claim for compensation and directed notice, challenging demolition threats for highway extension. Court disposed of petition granting liberty to submit representation to the collector and directing disposal within a fortnight, explicitly declining to grant stay.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to submit comprehensive representation to the Additional District Magistrate within 7 days; direction to authority to consider and dispose of representation within a fortnight after hearing; n

Johur Ali Vs Union of India and Ors. — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Calcutta HC (2022)

¶1

13 jdt.

¶2

08.08.2022 jb.

¶3

W.P.A. 150 of 2022 (Johur Ali vs. Union of India & Ors.)

¶4

Mr. Arindam Das Ms. Rumeli Sarkar …. For the Petitioner

¶5

Ms. Monika Roy …. For the NHAI Mr. Ansar Mondal Mr. Sougata Mitra …. For the State

¶6

The petitioner claims to be recorded owner of 0.04 acres of land in plot No. 575 Khatian No. 819, Mouza Umarpur and submits that though no portion of his land has been acquired by the authority, the National Highways Authority of India intends to demolish the structures standing thereon for the purpose of extension of the National Highways and served notice under Section 26(2) of the Control of National Highways (Land and Traffic) Act, 2002. The petitioner claims to be the owner of 0.01 acres of land proposed to be utilised by the National Highways Authority of India and claims compensation for the said land and structures thereon.

¶7

It is submitted on behalf of the National Highways Authority of India that the petitioner submitted a reply to the notice issued to him and after hearing the petitioner, the objection of the petitioner was disposed of on merits. The alleged encroachment

¶8

¶9

was admitted by the petitioner before the authority and the petitioner undertook to remove the said unauthorised structure from the plot in question. According to the learned advocate for the National Highways Authority of India, the petitioner has encroached about 320 sq. ft. of the existing right of way of NH 34.

¶10

Learned counsel for the State respondents is unable to indicate as to whether the acquired portion of 0.01 acres is part and parcel of 0.04 acres claimed to be owned and occupied by the petitioner.

¶11

The petitioner seeks liberty to submit a comprehensive representation before the Additional District Magistrate, (Land Acquisition Collector), being the 7^th respondent herein, ventilating his grievances and stating the entire facts and circumstances of the matter and prays for direction upon the authority to consider the representation at the earliest.

¶12

In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to submit a comprehensive representation in this regard before the 7^th respondent within 7 days from date.

¶13

The 7^th respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the representation submitted by the petitioner within a fortnight from the date of receipt thereof after granting reasonable opportunity of hearing

¶14

¶15

to the interested parties including the petitioner, in accordance with law.

¶16

The decision taken by the authority shall be communicated to the petitioner within a week thereof.

¶17

It is pertinent to add that prayer for grant of stay of demolition of the structure on the plot in question made by the petitioner is not considered at this stage. In the event it is found that portion of the petitioner’s plot has been acquired, the petitioner shall be entitled to compensation for the said land and structures thereon.

¶18

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶19

Since no affidavit has been invited, allegations contained in the writ petition shall be deemed not to have been admitted.

¶20

Urgent certified website copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties on compliance of requisite formalities.

¶21

(Suvra Ghosh, J.)

Johur Ali v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Johur Ali v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mantu Gopal Deogharia and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Bijay Mohan Adhikari Vs the Assistant Labour Commissioner Central Raniganj and Others

Nunnehaar Bibi Vs the Dist Magistrate, Birbhum & Ors.

Amar Kumar Maiti Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Ranjit Ghosh & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Dipak Kumar Ray Vs Union of India & or