Contempt petitions alleging non-implementation of a 2017 order directing the State to complete land acquisition under the Mizoram Act, 2016. Respondents produced the acquisition Award; the Court held the order stood complied with and declined to examine validity of the State's orders.
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.# 1/7
GAHC030000112018
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/24/2017
C Rosangluaia and 7 Ors. Kawrthah Mamit
2: P C Lalbiaksanga Kawrthah Mamit
3: H Lalchhuanga Kawrthah Mamit
4: V L Tawka Pachuau Kawrthah Mamit
5: C Lalhmingthanga Kawrthah Mamit
6: Biakthanthuama Kawrthah Mamit
7: P C Lalhmingliana Kawrthah Mamit
8: H Valbuanga Kawrthah Mamit VERSUS
Lalramthanga Secy PWD Govt. of Mizoram and 18 Ors.
Page No.# 2/7
Aizawl
2:Lalramnghaka Secy LR and S Dept Govt of Mizoram Aizawl 3:Lalmalsawma Secy Finance Deptt Govt. of Mizoram Aizawl 4:Lalbiaksangi DC Mamit Mamit 5:R Lalrintluanga CE PWD Roads Govt. of Mizoram Aizawl 6:J Zothanpuia SE PWD Western Circle Aizawl 7:R Zirsangliana EE PWD Kawrthah Division Mamit 8:Lalnunmawia Chuaungo Secy Finance Deptt Govt. of Mizoram Aizawl 9:Bhupesh Chaudhury DC Mamit Mamit 10:H L Rochungnunga Secy PWD Govt. of Mizoram Aizawl
Page No.# 3/7
11:Sawihlira Secy Finance Deptt Aizawl 12:Dr. Lalrozama DC Mamit Mamit
13:Vanlalmuana SE PWD Western Circle Aizawl
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr Lalfakawma Advocate for the Respondent : Mr B Lalramenga for R1
Cont.Cas(C)/23/2018
Z Zothansanga and 10 Ors Kawrthah, Mamit District 2: Lalremmawia
3: Lalchunglura Ralte
4: R Thankimi
5: Ralzidinga Ralte
6: B Lalrosanga
7: Lalthanpuii
8: Lalchunglura Ralte
9: Biakthansanga
10: Lalawi
Page No.# 4/7
VERSUS
Lalramthanga and 14 Ors Aizawl2:R Lalramnghaka Secy to Govt. of Mizoram LR and S Deptt.
3:Sawihlira Secy to Govt. of Mizoram Finance Deptt 4:Vanlalngaihsaka DC Mamit
5:R Lalrintluanga CE PWD Roads
6:Vanlalmuana PWD Mizoram
7:P Lalnunsanga PWD Kawrthah
8:H L ROchungnunga Secy to Govt. of Mizoram PWD
9:Dr. Lalrozama DC Mami
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. T Lalzekima
Advocate for the Respondent : Ms Lalhmingthangi Fanai
Page No.# 5/7
BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
12.09.2024
Heard Mr. Lalfakawma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Lalramenga, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 3, 5, 8, 12 & 13.
This application is filed under Rule 9 of the Contempt of Court (Gauhati High Court) Rules, 1997 read with Section 11 & 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and Article 215 of the Constitution of India bringing notice of the alleged non-implementation of the Judgment & Order dated 13.06.2017 passed by the Hon’ble Court in Review Petition No. 2/2018 alongwith WP(C) No. 122/2016.
The operating portion of the Order dated 10.07.2017 is reproduced hereunder for ready reference:-
“11. In the result, the writ petition is disposed with a direction to the State respondents to take a decision as to whether the land acquisition proceedings should be initiated and completed in terms of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 or by the Mizoram (Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation & Resettlement) Act, 2016 and its Amendment within a period of 1 (one) month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Order. The respondent No.2 i.e., the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Mizoram shall cause necessary process to ensure that the decision is taken by the State Government within the stipulated time as directed. Upon the decision being taken, the respondents shall proceed with the acquisition proceedings and complete the entire exercise within a period of 5 (five) months. It is also made clear that the State respondents would be at liberty to consider the case of other similarly situated land owners who are affected due to the construction and up-gradation of KDZKT Road.
Page No.# 6/7
Liberty is also given to the State respondents to deduct the financial assistance already given to the petitioners and those similarly situated.”
It is submitted at the bar that the acquisition proceedings had been completed in terms of the aforesaid order.
In support of the same, Mrs. Mary L. Khiangte, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 15 has submitted a copy of the Award, which was forwarded to the Deputy Commissioner, Mamit District, Mamit by the Under Secretary to the Government of Mizoram, Land Revenue & Settlement Department by letter dated 15.11.2021.
A copy of the said Award alongwith the relevant correspondences handed over to the Court is kept on record and marked as “X”.
However, Mr. Lalfakawma, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though in terms of the Court’s Order dated 11.04.2018, the respondents have invoked the provision of Clause A of sub Section 1 of Section 44 of the Mizoram (Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement) Act, 2016, however, the direction to the effect that the land acquisition award shall be made based on market value of the petitioners’ land to be determined as on 01.05.2013 (the date the preliminary notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was published in the Mizoram Gazette) is totally in violation of Section 26 of the said Act, inasmuch as, under Section 26, the date ought to have been from the date on which the Notification under Section 11 of the said Act was issued i.e., 26.05.2020.
Be that as it may, apparent that the order of this Court dated 10.07.2017 stands complied. This Court while exercising contempt jurisdiction cannot go
Page No.# 7/7
into the validity of the orders passed by the State Government.
Accordingly, nothing survives for adjudication in the instant contempt petition.
As such, the contempt petition stands closed.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the State respondents complied with the Court's order dated 10.07.2017 directing completion of land acquisition proceedings for petitioners' land.
7 provisions across 5 enactments
C Rosangluaia and 7 Ors.
Lalramthanga, Secy PWD Govt. of Mizoram and 18 Ors.
Kaushik Goswami
As recorded by the court registry
Proceedings for wilful disobedience of a court order under the Contempt of Courts Act 1971.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
