Disposed

Tapak Rai v. The State of Ap and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC12 Aug 2024WP(C)/325/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought relief for unpaid land acquisition compensation. The authorities acknowledged the shortfall. The Bench settled the matter by disposing of the petition and directing the Deputy Commissioner to act on a fresh representation within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed; petitioner permitted to file fresh representation; Deputy Commissioner to pass reasoned order within four weeks.

Tapak Rai Vs The State of Ap and 3 Ors. — Land Acquisition | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC040010102024

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/325/2024

¶5

Tapak Rai

¶6

Son of Late Tagi Rai, Resident of Nacho, PO Nacho, Upper Subansiri District, Arunachal Pradesh 791122

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

The State of AP and 3 Ors

¶9

represented by the Secretary, Land Management, Govt of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar 791111

¶10

2:The Deputy Commissioner

¶11

Upper Subansiri District, Daporijo, Arunachal Pradesh.

¶12

3:The Chief Engineer (Highway)

¶13

West Zone, PWD, Itanagar, Arunachal Pradesh.

¶14

4:The Union of India

¶15

represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highway, Govt. of India Transport Bhawan, No.1, Parliament Street, New Delhi.

¶16

Advocate for the Petitioner : Subu Koyang

¶17

Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP)

¶18

BEFORE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

¶19

Page No.# 2/4

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Date : 13-08-2024

¶22

Heard Mr. S. Koyang, learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶23

The grievance of the petitioner is that while constructing a road from Taliha to Nacho, the property of the petitioner has been acquired. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent themselves has assessed the compensation for such acquisition to be Rs. 1,42,29,044/- (Rupees One Crore Forty Two Lakhs Twenty Nine Thousand Forty Four)only but even after such assessment, according to the petitioner, he was paid Rs. 1,15,88,548/-(Rupees One Crore Fifteen Lakhs Eighty Eight Thousand Five Hundred Forty Eight)only, and an amount of Rs. 26,40,496/-(Rupees Twenty Six Lakhs Forty Thousand Four Hundred Ninety Six)only is yet to be paid to the petitioner, in terms of the assessment made by the respondent themselves. It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner has filed two representations before the respondent authorities on 05.02.2016 and another dated 08.03.2022, however, two of no avail.

¶24

Accordingly, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall have no grievance at this stage, if the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondent authorities to consider his representations and pay the already assessed amount

¶25

Page No.# 3/4

¶26

within specific time period.

¶27

The learned Additional Advocate General, Mr. R. H. Nabam for the State has submitted that if representation is filed, the State will definitely consider such representation, however, in accordance with law.

¶28

In view of the aforesaid consensus, the writ petition is disposed of at motion stage, permitting the writ petitioner to file a fresh representation before the concerned Deputy Commissioner and on receipt of such representation filed by the petitioner, let the competent authority i.e. the Deputy Commissioner, consider the grievance of the petitioner and pass a reasoned order, in this regard. Such exercise be completed within a period of 4(four) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order to be furnished by the petitioner before the concerned Deputy Commissioner along with his fresh representation.

¶29

In view of the above, the instant writ petition stands disposed

of.

JUDGE

Page No.# 4/4

Comparing Assistant

Tapak Rai v. The State of Ap and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tapak Rai v. The State of Ap and 3 Ors.

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

The Union of India and 4 Ors. Vs M/s Phurpa Tsering

Albert Mra Vs The Union of India and 5 Ors.

Nannu Pertin Vs the State of Ap and Anr.

Larjum Doye Vs The State of Ap and 6 Others

Yamek Mize Taggu Vs the State of Ap and 6 Ors.

Larjum Doye Vs the State of Ap and 6 Ors.