Disposed

Lham Goley v. the Union of India

Gauhati HC18 Nov 2020WP(C)/317/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged army land occupation. Court directed Deputy Commissioner, Tawang, to dispose of specific representations within one month with speaking orders after consulting both sides, then disposed of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Deputy Commissioner, Tawang, directed to dispose of listed representations within one month with speaking orders after consulting both sides.

Lham Goley Vs the Union of India — Writ and Judicial Review | Gauhati HC (2020)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC040007922020

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 317/2020

¶5

1:Lham Goley

¶6

S/O LT. DORJEE NORBU, GAON BURAH (GB), GYANGKHAR VILLAGE, PO LEMBERDUNG AND PS TAWANG, AP.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE UNION OF INDIA

¶9

THROUGH THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI.

¶10

2:THE COMMANDER

¶11

REGIMENT VETERINARY CORE JUMBO HOLIDAY HOME GYANGKHAR TAWANG DISTRICT AP.

¶12

3:THE DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICER C/O 99 APO TEZPUR ASSAM.

¶13

4:THE STATE OF AP

¶14

THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF AP ITANAGAR.

¶15

5:THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF LAND MANAGEMENT GOVT. OF AP ITANAGAR.

¶16

Page No.# 2/3

¶17

6:THE DIRECTOR OF LAND MANAGEMENT GOVT. OF AP ITANAGAR.

¶18

7:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TAWANG DISTRICT TAWANG AP

¶19

Advocate for the Petitioner : Jumgam Jini

¶20

Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP)

¶21

BEFORE

¶22

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Date : 18-11-2020

¶25

Heard J. Jini, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. N. Ratan, learned CGC appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3; Mr. I. Riram, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appearing for Respondent Nos. 4 & 7, as well as Mr. D. Kamduk, learned Standing Counsel for the Land Management Department appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos. 5 & 6.

¶26

In the year 1976, the Indian Army had taken over 2.946 acres of private land on rental basis. It has been submitted that the army had assured the villagers and offered to train about modern technique of cattle rearing, Horticulture development and intensive cultivation etc. According to the petitioner, army failed to keep this promise and continue to occupy the land where an army veterinary unit has been established. The petitioner has raised that since 1976, the army has been occupying the land but they are not paying for the rent nor did they keep their promise. Therefore, the villagers now want their land back. Alternatively, they want their land to be lawfully acquired by the Government, so that they could give some compensation. Since the year 1981,

¶27

Page No.# 3/3

¶28

the villagers had been filing representations before the Deputy Commissioner, Tawang, to resolve their grievances. On one occasion, they also approached this Court vide No. WP(C) 155(AP)/2010, this Court directed the Deputy Commissioner, Tawang, to convene a meeting of villagers as well as army officials to resolve the dispute, which also did not bring any result. Even the Chief Minister of the State of Arunachal Pradesh has written a letter on 23.01.2020 to the Union Defence Minister on the said matter and the letter is annexed in the record. In the said letter, the Chief Minister has informed the Defence Minister that there are suitable lands at a distance of 20 Km from the present location where the army Veterinary Unit can be shifted.

¶29

Be that as it may, the petitioner has prayed before this Court that the representations dated 12.04.1981, 07.05.2009, 25.08.2011, 02.06.2013, 04.08.2020 and 10.09.2020 are to be disposed first by the Deputy Commissioner, Tawang.

¶30

Today, I am of the considered opinion that because of the limited prayer made by the petitioner, the present writ petition can be disposed of today itself. Accordingly, it is hereby directed that the Deputy Commissioner, Tawang, shall disposed of those representations dated 12.04.1981, 07.05.2009, 25.08.2011, 02.06.2013, 04.08.2020 and 10.09.2020 within next 1(one) month with a speaking orders after consulting both sides.

¶31

In view of the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition is disposed of at the motion stage.

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

Comparing Assistant

Lham Goley v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lham Goley v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Fireman Tommo Nomuk Vs The State of Ap and Others

M/S Sedi Allied Agency Vs the State of Ap

Himin Lollen Vs Karge Lollen

Batem Pertin Vs Arunachal Pradesh Information Commission

M/S Kenge Construction and Company Vs The State of Ap

Radhe Pampi Vs the State of Ap