Disposed

Nasim Ahmed Barbhuiya and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 9 Ors.

Gauhati HC6 Apr 2018WP(C)/537/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioners claim zirat compensation for land acquired for a bye-pass road, alleging tenants were wrongly assessed. The Court disposed of the petition by directing the Deputy Commissioner to revisit the assessment and allow the petitioners to prove they developed the structures.

What did the court decide?

The Deputy Commissioner, Cachar shall issue notice to claimants and conduct an inquiry to determine entitlement to zirat compensation for standing structures on the disputed land.

Nasim Ahmed Barbhuiya and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 9… — Land Acquisition | Gauhati HC (2018)

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010106272016

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 537/2016

¶5

1:NASIM AHMED BARBHUIYA and ANR. S/O- KUTUB UDDIN BARBHUIYA

¶6

2: HASIN AHMED BARBHUIYA S/O- KUTUB UDDIN BARBHUIYA BOTH ARE R/O VILL.- DAKSHIN KRISHNAPUR P.S.- SILCHAR SADAR P.O.- SONABARIGHAT DIST.- CACHAR ASSAM PIN- 788013

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM and 9 ORS.

¶9

REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DEPTT. OF REVENUE and DM LR, ASSAM CIVIL SECRETARIAT, DISPUR, GHY- 6.

¶10

2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL ROAD DEPTT. and SPECIAL SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT and HIGHWAYS GOVT. OF INDIA TRANSPORT BHAWAN PARLIAMENT STREET NEW DELHI PIN- 110001.

¶11

3:THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE TRANSPORT and NATIONAL HIGHWAYS GOVT. OF INDIA TRANSPORT BHAWAN

¶12

Page No.# 2/5

¶13

PARLIAMENT STREET NEW DELHI PIN- 110001. 4:THE CHIEF GENERAL MANGER NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITIES OF INDIA NO. G-5 and 6 SECTOR- 10 DWARKA NEW DELHI PIN- 110075. 5:THE COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DEPTT. OF P.W.D. N.H. ASSAM CIVIL SECRETARIAT BLOCK- C DISPUR GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN- 781006. 6:THE DY. COMMISSIONER CUM COLLECTOR CACHAR SILCHAR ASSAM PIN- 788001. 7:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PWD ASSAM NH WORKS ASSAM CHANDMARI GUWAHATI ASSAM- 781003. 8:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD NH DIV. SILCHAR BUILDING DIVISION CACHAR ASSAM PIN- 788001. 9:MOHMOOD HUSSAIN LASKAR S/O- MONOJIR ALI LASKAR R/O VILL.- DAKHIN KRISHNAPUR PH BARAKPAR P.S.- SILCHAR DIST.- CACHAR ASSAM

¶14

Page No.# 3/5

¶15

PIN- 788013.

¶16

10:DALIM HUSSAIN MAZUMDER S/O- LT. NOUR UDDIN MAZUMDER R/O VILL.- DAKHIN KRISHNAPUR PH BARAKPAR P.S.- SILCHAR DIST.- CACHAR ASSAM PIN- 788013

¶17

Advocate for the Petitioner : MRA R BHUYAN

¶18

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶19

BEFORE

¶20

HON BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASANTA KUMAR DEKA

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Date : 06-04-2018

¶23

Heard Mr.A.R.Bhuyan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr.A.K.Dutta, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 9 and 10, Ms.M.Borua, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 5,7 and 8 and Mr.S.R.Baruah, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for respondent Nos 1 and 6.

¶24

The petitioners are the sons of Md. Kutub Uddin Barbhuiya who is the owner of land covered by dag No. 151/161 and patta No. 49/53 situated at Barakpar under Mauza Dakshin Krishnapur in the district of Cachar. Over the said land the present petitioners raised a construction and let out the same to respondent Nos. 9 and 10. The said land was the subject matter of LA Case No. 3/2008-09 by way of which the land was acquired for construction of Silchar bye-pass road. The competent authority and the other State respondent while preparing the list of the affected persons with respect to zirat the names of the petitioners were excluded and the names of private respondent have been shown at serial No. 20 and 22 purportedly as the owner/owners . As the owner of the zirat (standing permanent structures) standing there on the land and the respective compensation amount were assessed , the names of the said tenant, respondent Nos. 9 and 10, were shown as

¶25

Page No.# 4/5

¶26

beneficiaries instead of the petitioners’ name being shown. On the basis of said list of beneficiaries of the compensation, the LA Case No. 3/2008-09 was initiated and requisite notifications were issued.

¶27

The earlier assessment against the compensation was subsequently enhanced vide letter dated 4.6.2014 issued by the Secretary, Revenue Disaster Management Department. The petitioners being aggrieved have filed this writ petition as they have not received their compensation against the zirat standing over the land of their father which are assessed in the names of respondent Nos. 9 and 10, who are tenants under the present petitioners.

¶28

Mr.Bhuyan, submits that the copy of the order passed in WP(C) No. 1417/2015 dated 1.8.2017 which covers the same land under the same notifications as that of the present petitioners and their father. The valuation of the zirat as assessed by the Executive Engineer, PWD , Silchar Building Division, Silchar which forms Annexure 2 in this writ petition was also the subject matter in the said WP(C) No.1471/2015. The operative portion of the order passed in the said writ petition is reproduced herein below:

¶29

“14. In such view of the matter, it is felt necessary that the aforesaid examination is required to be made by the Deputy Commissioner, Cachar. Accordingly, the Deputy Commissioner, Cachar shall issue notice upon the aforesaid 21 petitioners and give them an opportunity to present their case including any material that they may desire to produce that their entry into the land which has been acquired was a legitimate entry and therefore, they are entitled to zirat compensation on such land. However, such person would also have to establish before the Deputy Commissioner that the development of the land was made by them and it is they who are entitled for such zirat compensation.

¶30

In the aforesaid process, the Deputy Commissioner shall also give them an opportunity of hearing to the concerned officials of the respondent PWD. Upon undertaking such exercise, the Deputy Commissioner shall pass a speaking order as regards the entitlement of the aforesaid 21 petitioners to the payment of zirat compensation for the acquisition of the land in question.

¶31

The aforesaid exercise shall be carried out within a period of 6(six) months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶32

Writ petition is accordingly disposed of.”

¶33

Mr.Bhuyan submits that as the said assessment list will be re-visited by the concerned authority and the opportunity has been given to each and every claimant to prove the manner of entry to the said land, the proof with regard to the construction of the said

¶34

Page No.# 5/5

¶35

structure, under such circumstances, Mr. Bhuyan submits that this writ petition may be closed by giving similar direction as that passed in WP(C) 1417/2015.

¶36

Mr.Dutta, on the other hand, is acceptable to the submission of Mr.Bhuyan. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of as per observation made in the said WP(C) 1417/2015 disposed of on 1.8.2017 thereby allowing the petitioners to prove their ownership of the standing structures which were let out to the respondents No.9 and 10.

¶37

A copy of order passed in WP(C) 1417/2015 be kept as a part of the record.

¶38

JUDGE

¶39

Comparing Assistant

Nasim Ahmed Barbhuiya and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 9 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nasim Ahmed Barbhuiya and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 9 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramen Gohain Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Manomohan Talukdar Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Alom Hussain Mazumder Vs Zakir Hussain Mazumder and 8 Ors.

Ananta Gogoi Vs Idbi Bank Ltd. and 5 Ors.

Rousenara Begum Laskar Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

M/S Hotel Barak Residency and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.