Disposed

Banshi Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand through the Deputy Commissioner

Jharkhand HC2 Jul 2018WPC/2303/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought directions for payment of compensation and award for acquired land and structures which remained unpaid since 2014. The High Court ordered trial authorities to re-examine the legality and facts and pay the compensation within 12 weeks if no legal impediment exists, while explicitly stating the Court did not decide on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Directs Respondent No. 4 to decide on compensation representation within 12 weeks and release funds if no legal impediment exists.

Banshi Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Deputy… — Land Acquisition | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 2303 of 2018

¶3

Banshi Yadav ….. Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand, through the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad

¶6

The Circle Officer, Govindpur, Dhanbad

¶7

The Additional Collector-cum-the competent authority under the National Highway Act, 1956, Dhanbad

¶8

The District Land Acquisition Officer, Dhanbad

¶9

National Highway Authority of India, through its Chairman, New Delhi

¶10

Project Director, National Highway Authority of India, Burdwan (W.B)

….. Respondents

CORAM

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶15

¶16

For the Petitioner: Mr. Manoj Kumar Ram For the State: Mr. Aditya Raman, A.C to G.A-IV For NHAI: Ms. Sweety Topno

¶17

¶18

04/02.07.2018 The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon

¶19

the respondents to make payment of compensation to the petitioner in lieu of acquisition of his land.

¶20

The petitioner along with three other persons had purchased the land in question from Santlal Sahni and Dilip Kumar Gupta vide registered sale deeds dated 25.02.2008 and 28.02.2011 respectively. The description of the said land detailed in the writ petition is as follows:

¶21

Mauza	Saharjori
Mauza No.	122
Khata No.	4
Plot No.	1314
Acquired Area	14 decimals

¶22

The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the preparation of the award in the year 2014 itself, no payment of compensation has been made with regard to acquisition of the said land as well as the structure standing over it. The petitioner has already preferred an objection before the Arbitrator, Dhanbad on 25.04.2018 and thereafter has also made an application raising his objection before the District Land Acquisition Officer, Dhanbad (respondent No.4) with detailed facts. Though the structure valuation report prepared at the instance of the respondent-National Highway Authority of India (in short NHAI) is

¶23

undervalued, yet the compensation in terms with the said valuation has not been paid till date.

¶24

Ms. Sweety Topno, learned counsel for the NHAI, submits that the valuation report was prepared in presence of the petitioner and as such it is not open to the petitioner to dispute the said valuation report before this Court. So far as the issue of payment of compensation is concerned, the same is awaited for want of the requisite fund from the competent authority of the NHAI. It is however not clear as to whether any award in favour of the petitioner has been prepared in this regard.

¶25

In view of the aforesaid rival submissions made on behalf of the parties, the petitioner is at liberty to prefer a fresh representation before the respondent No. 4. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent No. 4, after verifying the facts from the record, shall take appropriate decision in this regard within a period of 12 (twelve) weeks from the date of filing of the said representation. If it is found that there is no legal impediment for release of compensation in favour of the petitioner in lieu of acquisition of the land and the structure over it, the same shall be released in favour of the petitioner within a reasonable time. It is however made clear that this Court has not gone into the merit of the case.

¶26

This writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid liberty and direction.

¶27

(RAJESH SHANKAR, J)

¶28

Satish/-

Banshi Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand through the Deputy Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Banshi Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand through the Deputy Commissioner

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

Gouri Shankar Jain Vs the Union of India through the Ministry of Railways

Fibi Malto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jyoti Prakash Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Rajendra Singh Vs State of Jharkhand

Wakar Khan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Anju Kumari Vs the State of Jharkhand