Appeal admitted challenging a lower court order directing payment of solatium and interest under the 2013 Land Acquisition Act against a 1947 Regulation. Impugned order stayed pending further orders; matter listed after two weeks.
Impugned judgment and order stayed until further orders; appeal admitted; notice issued to respondents.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC040006802022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)
Case No. : IA(C) 108/2022
Linked Case : WA 17/2022 1:THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors. Represented by the Secretary (Land Management) Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh.
2: The Deputy Commissioner Lower Subansiri District Ziro Arunachal Pradesh. 3: The Chief Engineer (Highway) Western Zone PWD Itanagar Arunachal Pradesh. VERSUS 1:Koj Tapin and Anr. S/o Late Koj Kojee Village Dutta PO/PS Ziro Lower Subansiri District (AP)
Mob. No. 8132091401
2:THE UNION OF INDIA Represented by the Secretary Ministry of Road Transport and Highway Govt. of India
Page No.# 2/3
Transport Bhawan No. 1 Parliament Street New Delhi 11001
Advocate for the Petitioner : Subu Tapin Advocate for the Respondent : Marto Kato
BEFORE
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO HONBLE MRS. JUSTICE MARLI VANKUNG
ORDER
Date : 20-07-2022
Heard Mr. Kardak Ete, learned Advocate General assisted by S. Tapin, learned Senior Government Advocate.
By filing this appeal, the appellants have challenged the Judgment & Order dated 25.04.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 303(AP)/2020. The learned Advocate General submits that by the impugned judgment & order, the learned Single Judge has directed computation of solatium and interest payable to the land owners for the construction of Trans Arunachal Highway and also 33/11 KV Substation and Bombdila By-pass. The learned Advocate General referring to the Balipara/Tirap/Sadiya Frontier Tract Jhum Land Regulation, 1947 (Regulation of 1947) submits that the same does not provide for payment of solatium and interest. However, the learned Single Judge, vide the impugned Judgment & Order, by holding that Regulation of 1947 is inconsistent with the Right to Fair Compensation & Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation & Re-settlement Act, 2013 (Act of 2013) directed the payment of interest and solatium to the land owners. The learned Advocate General submits that besides this, direction has been issued to the State respondents to calculate and pay the solatium and interest to the land owners, whereas the funding for the entire project is done by the Ministry of Road Transport &
Page No.# 3/3
Highway, Govt. of India.
Having regard to the grounds taken by the appellants, we are of the considered view that the same requires a detailed consideration. As such, let the appeal be admitted. Issue notice to the respondents returnable by 2 (two) weeks. Mr. S. Koyang learned counsel, at this stage, appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent No. 1. As such formal notice will not be required. Mr. T. Deliyang appears on on behalf of Mr. M. Kato, learned ASGI and accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 2. As such formal notice will not be required upon the respondents. However, appellants to serve requisite copies of the Memo of Appeal to the respondents, if not already done.
Considering the issue raise in the appeal, the impugned judgment & order shall remain stayed until further orders.
List the matter again after 2 (two) weeks , on a date to be fixed by the Registry.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the land acquisition regulation of 1947 is inconsistent with the 2013 Land Acquisition Act regarding solatium and interest.
Whether the direction to pay solatium and interest to land owners in the impugned order requires detailed consideration.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
THE STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH
THE UNION OF INDIA
KOJ TAPIN AND ANR
NELSON SAILO
MARLI VANKUNG
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
