Disposed

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

Calcutta HC8 Aug 2022WPA/27584/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court addressed a writ petition regarding undeclared land acquisition compensation under the National Highways Act, 1956. Determining that the 2013 Act was not retroactively applicable to pre-notification awards, the court directed petitioners to approach the Arbitrator for relief under Section 3(G)(5) of the 1956 Act. The court explicitly held that it did not decide the substantive merits.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners permitted to approach the District Magistrate and Arbitrator under Section 3(G)(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 within a fortnight; Arbitrator directed to dispose of application with

Ranjit Ghosh & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors. — Land Acquisition | Calcutta HC (2022)

¶1

August 08, 2022 ARDR (9)

¶2

WPA 27584 of 2017

¶3

Ranjit Ghosh & anr. Vs. The Union of India & Ors.

¶4

Mr. Arindam Das, Ms. Rumeli Sarkar,

¶5

Mr. Dipankar Das, Mr. Anirban Ray, Ld. G.P., Md. T. M. Siddiqui, Mr. Nilotpal Chatterjee,

¶6

…for the petitioners. …for the NHAI.

¶7

…for the State.

¶8

The primary grievance of the petitioners is with regard to the award declared by the State respondents in lieu of acquisition of the plots of land of which they claim to be recorded owners. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that a copy of the award was not served upon the petitioners by the authority and it was only during pendency of the writ petition that the petitioners received a copy of such award which was passed on 3^rd July, 2015. Relying on the Manual of Land Acquisition for National Highways under the National Highways Act, 1956 it is submitted that in terms of clause 2.5 (iii) of the said Manual, in cases of land acquisition where awards have not been announced under Section 3(G) of the Act of 1956 till 31^st December, 2014 or where such awards have been announced but compensation have not been paid to majority of the land holders, the compensation would be payable in accordance with the 1^st schedule of

¶9

¶10

the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. It is further submitted that the petitioners were unable to take recourse under Section 3(G)(5) of the Act of 1956 in absence of a copy of the award.

¶11

Per contra, it is submitted on behalf of the respondents that the Manual under the National Highways Act, 1956 came into effect from December, 2018 whereas the award was declared on 3^rd July, 2015. Further, Section 105 of the Act of 2013 excluded the application of this Act to acquisition proceedings under the Act of 1956. By a notification issued on 28^th August, 2015, the 2013 Act was made applicable to cases of land acquisition under the 1956 Act.

¶12

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that as the award in this case was declared prior to the said dates, the Act of 2013 is not applicable herein and the petitioners are not entitled to get compensation in terms of the 2013 Act.

¶13

It is submitted on behalf of the National Highways Authority of India that the petitioners have already received the compensation awarded under Section 3(G) (1) of the Act of 1956, the said fact not being disputed by the petitioners.

¶14

Upon consideration of the submission made on behalf of the parties, this Court is of the view that upon receipt of a copy of an award by the petitioners in course

¶15

¶16

of hearing of the present writ petition, the petitioners are at liberty to approach the 6^th respondent under Section 3(G)(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 within a fortnight from date. The District Magistrate, Nadia and Arbitrator, being the 6^th respondent herein, is directed to consider and dispose of the application filed by the petitioners after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to all the interested parties including the petitioners, in accordance with law, within six months from the date of receipt of the application.

¶17

It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merit of the case and the petitioners shall be at liberty to place their contention before the learned Arbitrator at the time of hearing.

¶18

With the above observations and directions, WPA 27584 of 2017 is disposed of. There shall however, be no order as to costs.

¶19

Since no affidavit is invited, the allegations contained in the petition are deemed not to be admitted.

¶20

Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to the parties upon compliance of necessary formalities.

¶21

(Suvra Ghosh, J.)

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjit Ghosh & Anr. v. Union of India & 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.

Johur Ali Vs Union of India and Ors.

Amar Kumar Maiti Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Dipak Kumar Ray Vs Union of India & or