Disposed

Mukesh Kumar Burnwal v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC5 Jul 2019WPC/740/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the quantum of compensation for land acquisition. Without adjudicating the merits, the Court directed respondent No. 4 to dispose of the pending arbitration case within three months after hearing affected parties.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No. 4 to decide Arbitration Case No.42 of 2017 within three months from the date of receipt of the order copy.

Mukesh Kumar Burnwal Vs the State of Jharkhand — Arbitration | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

W.P.(C) No.740 of 2019

¶4

--------

¶5

Mukesh Kumar Burnwal, aged about 38 years, Son of Late Kamleshwar Prasad Burnwal, Resident of Village & P.O. & P.S.- Topchanchi, Dist.Dhanbad (Jharkhand). …… Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand.

¶8

The Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad, P.O. & P.S. & Dist.- Dhanbad (Jharkhand).

¶9

The Arbitrator [Under N.H. Act, 1956]-cum- Additional Collector, Dhanbad, P.O. & P.S. & Dist.- Dhanbad (Jharkhand).

¶10

The District Land Acquisition Officer-cum- Competent Authority (under National Highways Act, 1956), Dhanbad, P.O. & P.S. & Dist.- Dhanbad (Jharkhand).

¶11

The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Dhanbad, P.O. & P.S. & Dist.Dhanbad (Jharkhand).

¶12

…… Respondents

¶13

¶14

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD

¶15

¶16

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ramchander Sahu, Advocate For the Respondents : Ms. Sunita Devi, Advocate ----------------------------

¶17

05 / Dated 05^th July, 2019

¶18

This writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India whereby and whereunder the petitioner aggrieved with the quantum of compensation as approached before the competent authority in view of the provision of Section 3 (g) (5) of the National Highway Act, 1956 which was recorded as Arbitration Case No.42 of 2017 but as yet the same has not been decided, therefore, this writ petition.

¶19

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent has submitted that the appropriate order may be passed.

¶20

In view thereof and considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, with their consent and without going into the merit of the claim of the petitioner, this writ petition is accordingly disposed of, directing the respondent No.4 to dispose of the Arbitration Case No.42 of 2017 within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of the order after hearing the petitioner as well as other affected parties, if any.

¶21

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

¶22

Madhav

Mukesh Kumar Burnwal v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Kumar Burnwal v. the State of Jharkhand

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

Surendar Mahto Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Gopal Mishra Vs Land Reforms And Revenue Department

Shaukat Ansari Vs State of Jharkhand

Prasadi Sao Vs Rajendra Prasad Sao And Ors.

Aabid Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Md Yousuf Sheikh And Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.