Disposed

Moti Gowala and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC25 Apr 2022WP(C)/221/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order disposes of a petition concerning non-disbursement of land acquisition compensation. The court held that the matter must be addressed by the designated competent authority under the National Highways Act, 1956, and directed it to decide the petitioners' representation.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed; petitioner directed to file representation with Additional Deputy Commissioner within 2 weeks; authority to decide within 8 weeks.

Moti Gowala and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors. — Land Acquisition | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/7

¶2

GAHC010004482022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/221/2022

¶5

MOTI GOWALA AND ANR

¶6

S/O LATE RUPLAL GOWALA, RESIDENT OF NAMTIAL PATHAR, MOUZA NAGAR MAHAL, PO , PS AND DIST SIVASAGAR, ASSAM,

¶7

2: SRI TETERA GOWALA

¶8

S/O LATE RUPLAL GOWALA RESIDENT OF NAMTIAL PATHAR MOUZA NAGAR MAHAL PO PS AND DIST SIVASAGAR ASSA

¶9

VERSUS

¶10

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS

¶11

REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 06

¶12

2:THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED. REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR 3RD FLOOR PTI BUILDING 4 PARLIAMENT STREET NEW DELHI 110001.

¶13

3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

¶14

SIVASAGAR ASSAM 785640

¶15

4:THE ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (LAND ACUQISITION

¶16

Page No.# 2/7

¶17

BRANCH) SIVASAGAR ASSAM 785640

¶18

5:THE CIRCLE OFFICER

¶19

SIVASAGAR REVENUE CIRCLE SIVASAGAR ASSAM 78564

¶20

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P K GOGOI

¶21

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶22

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Date : 25.04.2022

¶25

Heard Mr. P. K. Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P.S. Deka, learned Senior Government Advocate appearing for respondent no.1, Ms. D. Deka, learned counsel who appears on behalf of Mr. R. K. Talukdar, learned Standing counsel for respondent no.2, the National Highway Authority and Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd, and Mr. B. Deori, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents no. 3, 4 and 5.

¶26

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners, who are aggrieved by non disbursement of the compensation amount payable by the respondents in respect of a plot of land stated to have been acquired by the Revenue authorities as per requisition of National Highway Authority and

¶27

Page No.# 3/7

¶28

Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd.

¶29

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners are the legal heirs of one Late Ruplal Guwala. The petitioners and their brothers claim to be the pattadars and the possessors of two plots of land covered by Dag no. 197, measuring 2 Kathas 19 Lessas and Dag No. 83 measuring 4 Bighas 3 Lessas of land. Both the plots of land are under one patta, namely, Patta No.42.

¶30

Referring to page 12 Annexure-‘A’ of the writ petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the names of the petitioners along with their brothers have been mutated by orders passed by the Circle Officer vide order dated 03.01.2015. The names of the petitioners and their brothers have been mutated in respect of the land covered by both the Dag numbers, namely, Dag No. 197 and Dag No.83.

¶31

The learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that the requisite Land Revenue has been regularly paid in respect of the land by the petitioners.

¶32

Vide order dated 26^th of September, 2019, the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways issued a Notification by which acquisition of land was notified in respect of land covered by Dag No.83. In the said Notification, the names of the petitioners and their brothers have also reflected as the owners along with other persons. Referring to the said Notification dated 26^th September, 2019 (Annexure-‘C’), the

¶33

Page No.# 4/7

¶34

learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the land acquired was under the Joint patta along with other persons whose names are also included alongwith the names of the petitioners as land owners in respect of the land covered under the Joint patta.

¶35

After the land was acquired, since no compensation was paid, the petitioner no.1 preferred a representation dated 24.04.2017 before the Additional Deputy Commissioner (Land Acquisition Branch), Sivasagar. The said representation is annexed as Annexure ‘E’ (Page 23) to the writ petition. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that inspite of the representation having being filed, the compensation for acquisition of land has not been released to the petitioners and their brothers. Being aggrieved the present writ petition has been filed.

¶36

The respondent no.4, Additional Deputy Commissioner, (Land Acquisition Branch), Sivasagar has filed their counter affidavit.

¶37

Mr. B. Deori, learned Government Advocate, relying on the affidavit submits that during the field survey the specific possession by the petitioners were not ascertained and therefore their share on the land could not be ascertained at the time of field survey. It is also submitted that an amount of Rs.10,38,800/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Thirty Eight Thousand Eight Hundred) only in respect of acquisition of 0.019 Hactors of land (i.e. 14 Lessa Land) along with structure value of Rs.23,

¶38

Page No.# 5/7

¶39

11, 995.68/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Eleven Thousand Nine Hundred Ninety Five and Sixty Eight Paisa) only has been granted in the name of Mrs. Renu Saikia, wife of Late Gonesh Das, as processor of structure in the said land.

¶40

Mr. P. S. Deka, learned Standing counsel for the Revenue Department submits that under the National Highways Act Section 3 G prescribes for the provisions for determination of the amount of compensation required to be paid. As per the provisions of Section 3 G any person having any grievance in respect of compensation must approach the designated competent authority namely, the Additional Deputy Commissioner of the District concerned. Thereafter, the Deputy Commissioner will proceed in the matter as per the provisions of the Act.

¶41

Having heard the learned counsels for the parties it is seen from the pleadings available on record that land belonging to the petitioners are covered by Joint patta along with other co-pattadars. There is a categorical averment by the Additional Deputy Commissioner in it’s affidavit that certain amount of compensation money has been disbursed to the land owner identified in the field survey. However, the Additional Deputy Commissioner has not referred to the representation preferred by the petitioner seeking redressal of his grievances.

¶42

Taking into consideration the various aspects urged in the matter and upon considerations of the submissions made

¶43

Page No.# 6/7

¶44

by the learned counsels for the parties, this Court is of the view that taking recourse to the specific provisions laid down under the National Highways Act, 1956 the matter ought to be decided by the designated authority prescribed under the provisions of the Act, to address the grievances ventilated by the petitioners.

¶45

The National Highways Act, 1956 has elaborate provisions prescribed under Section 3 (A) onwards to decide on any matter in respect of compensation claimed by the land owner. The competent authority designated has also been vested with ample powers to determine any dispute that may so arise in respect of dispensation of compensation to the land owners. In the event the competent authority prescribed is unable to take a decision in the matter, there is a provision under Section

¶46

3 G (5) to refer the matter to an arbitration.

¶47

Under Section 3 I the competent authority is also vested with certain powers of the civil court.

¶48

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent no.4, the Additional Deputy Commissioner (Land Acquisition Branch), Sivasagar to address the claims made by the petitioners vide its representation filed. The petitioner may also file a detailed representation if so advised before the Additional Deputy Commissioner for redressing its grievances. Such representation may be filed by the petitioner within 2 (two) weeks from the date of this order. Such representation if filed will also be accompanied by the

¶49

Page No.# 7/7

¶50

certified copy of the order passed by this Court.

¶51

Pursuant to such representation that may be filed by the petitioner, the matter will be decided by the competent authority, namely, respondent no.4 within a period of 8 (eight) weeks from the date of filing of such representation along with a certified copy of the order by the writ petitioner.

¶52

Any order i.e. passed by the competent authority must be in terms of the provisions laid down under the National Highways Act, 1956 and a copy thereof be served on the writ petitioners.

¶53

Writ petition accordingly, in terms of the above stands closed and disposed of.

¶54

JUDGE

¶55

Comparing Assistant

Moti Gowala and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Moti Gowala and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 4 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

Gombu Tsering Gonpapa and Anr. Vs the State Bank of India and 3 Ors.

Kumotia Fishery Samabai Samity Ltd. and Anr. Vs the Assam Fisheries Development Corporation Ltd. and 3 Ors.

Basa Terangpi @ Basa Teronpi and 4 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Dayaram Narzary Vs Pramod Kr. Brahma

Amrit Singh Dhillon Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Amrit Singh Dhillon Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.