Dismissed

Fazar Ali v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC15 Sept 2026WP(C)/6705/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged inadequacy of land acquisition compensation and non-receipt of awarded amount. Court held writ jurisdiction improper for adequacy challenge; directed petitioner to receive compensation per statutory award and dismissed petition as withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed liberty to receive awarded compensation by approaching concerned authority with requisite documents. Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to avail remedy under Section

Fazar Ali Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors. — Land Acquisition | Gauhati HC (2026)

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010262582024

undefined

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/6705/2024

¶6

FAZAR ALI

¶7

D/O FAZAR ALI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHAMATA PATHAR, PS SONAPUR, PO CHAMATA, DIST KAMRUP M ASSAM 782402

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS.

¶10

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

¶11

2:THE JOINT SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM REVENUE AND DM(LR) DEPARTMENT

¶12

DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006

¶13

3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER

¶14

KAMRUP (M) GUWAHATI 36

¶15

4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER

¶16

SONAPUR REVENUE CIRCLE

¶17

DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM 782402

¶18

5:THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER (PP AND D) ASSAM ELECTRICITY GRID CORPORATION LTD. BIJULI BHAWAN GUWAHATI 781001

¶19

6:THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER

¶20

132 KV EHV GRID SUBSTATION

¶21

ASSAM ELECTRICITY GRID CORPORATION LTD. KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI 78101

¶22

Page No.# 2/4

¶23

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR T H HAZARIKA, MR M CHETIA,MR A RASHID,MR. K ISLAM,MR. D ROY

¶24

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, GA, ASSAM,SC, AEGCL

¶25

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI

¶26

ORDER

¶27

Date : 16.09.2026

¶28

Heard Mr. M. Chetia, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M. Barman, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State respondent.

¶29

The grievance in this writ petition is inadequate compensation for land acquisition. It appears on the last occasion, i.e., 29.07.2026, when the matter was called, Ms. M. Barman, learned Government Advocate for the State respondent has placed before this Court the award statement, which is kept on record and marked as ‘X’.

¶30

It appears from the aforesaid award statement that the name of the petitioner finds place at Serial No. 7 thereof. It is, therefore, apparent that the first relief sought for in the writ petition stands redressed.

¶31

This Court, on 29.07.2026, having noted that the first relief sought for by the petitioner stood redressed, queried the learned counsel for the petitioner as to whether the petitioner had received the compensation awarded. At that stage, learned counsel for the petitioner sought time.

¶32

Today, when the matter is taken up, learned counsel for the

¶33

Page No.# 3/4

¶34

petitioner submits that the compensation awarded has not yet been received by the petitioner. He further submits that the compensation so awarded is inadequate and has not been determined in accordance with Sections 26 to 30 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 2013”).

¶35

Learned Government Advocate appearing for the State respondents further informs the Court, on instructions received by her office, that notice has already been issued to the petitioner calling upon him to receive the compensation. However, the petitioner is yet to approach the concerned authority with the requisite documents for receiving the said compensation.

¶36

The petitioner is, accordingly, at liberty, if so advised, to approach the concerned authority and receive the compensation upon furnishing the requisite documents in accordance with law.

¶37

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and having noted that compensation has already been awarded in favour of the petitioner, this Court is of the view that the question of adequacy of the compensation cannot be gone into in exercise of writ jurisdiction, particularly in view of Section 12 of the Assam Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1964, read with Section 64 of the Act of 2013, which provides for a remedy of reference in respect of the determination of compensation.

¶38

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner does not object to the aforesaid view and seeks permission to withdraw the present

¶39

Page No.# 4/4

¶40

writ petition, with liberty to avail the remedy available to the petitioner under Section 64 of the Act of 2013.

¶41

In view of the above, the writ petition stands dismissed as withdrawn, with the liberty as prayed for.

¶42

JUDGE

¶43

Comparing Assistant

Fazar Ali v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fazar Ali v. the State of Assam and 5 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