Disposed

Devendra Nath Mahato and Ors. v. Water Resources Department

Jharkhand HC6 Jan 2020WPC/5247/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition regarding payment for land acquired for the Swarnarekha Project. Instead of adjudicating the merit, it directed the petitioners to approach the Deputy Commissioner to clarify their claim, which must be decided within statutory timeframes.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with directions to petitioners to approach Deputy Commissioner to satisfy their claim within three weeks; Commissioner to decide representation within four weeks thereafter.

Devendra Nath Mahato and Ors. Vs Water Resources Department — Land Acquisition | Jharkhand HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.5247 of 2015

¶2

--------

¶3

Devendra Nath Mahato, Son of Late Bhola Nath Mahato

¶4

Nitai (Khoka) Mahato, Son of Late Kali Charan Mahato

¶5

Purna Shasi Mahato, Son of Late Sagar (Malindra) Mahato

¶6

Barun Shasi Mahato, Son of Late Sagar (Malindra) Mahato

¶7

Jaswant Mahato, Son of Late Sagar (Malindra) Mahato All residents of Village: Basurda, P.O. Itagarh, P.S. Gamharia, District: Saraikella-Kharsawan.

¶8

…… Petitioners

¶9

Versus

¶10

The State of Jharkhand

¶11

The Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Nepal House, P.O. & P.S.: Doranda, District: Ranchi.

¶12

The Deputy Commissioner, Saraikella-Kharsawan, P.O. + P.S.: Saraikella, District: Saraikella-Kharsawan.

¶13

The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Swarnarekha Project, Adityapur, P.O. & P.S.: Adityapur, District: Saraikella-Kharsawan.

¶14

…… Respondents

¶15

------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶16

------For the Petitioners : Mr. Vishal Kumar Tiwari, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Vineet Prakash, A.C. S.C. (L&C)-I ----------------------------

¶17

06 / Dated 06^th January, 2020

¶18

1. Heard Mr. Vishal Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Vineet Prakash, learned A.C. S.C. (L&C)-I appearing for the respondentState.

¶19

2. The petitioners have preferred this writ petition for a direction upon the respondents for making payment of the land acquired for the purpose of Swarnarekha Project, which appertains to Village: Basurda, Thana No.13, Khata No.42, Plot No.592, Area 49 decimals, total area 1 acre 81 decimals on the ground that the payment of aforesaid acquired land has not been made to the petitioners.

¶20

By way of referring Annexure-1 to the writ petition, Mr. Vishal Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there are several khata numbers at page-20 but the petitioners are concerned to the Khata No.42 only.

¶21

He further submits that the petitioners have also filed representation before respondent no.3-The Deputy Commissioner, Saraikella-Kharsawan as contained in Annexure-7 to the writ petition but

¶22

no decision has been taken as yet.

¶23

3. On the other hand, Mr. Vineet Prakash, learned A.C. S.C. (L&C)-I appearing for the respondent-State submits that there is dispute in this writ petition and the same cannot be decided under extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶24

4. Without going into the merits of the case, the petitioners are at liberty to approach afresh and satisfy the respondent no.3-The Deputy Commissioner, Saraikella-Kharsawan with regard to the claim of the petitioners within three weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order and the respondent no.3 will decide the representation of the petitioners in accordance with law within four weeks thereafter.

¶25

5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with the above directions and observations.

¶26

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶27

Madhav/-

Devendra Nath Mahato and Ors. v. Water Resources Department

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devendra Nath Mahato and Ors. v. Water Resources Department

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

Smt.Champa Devi Parmar Alias Champa Ben Parmar And Ors. Vs Birwa Munda And Ors.

Ms Govind Promoters Private Limited through Its Authorised Signatory Ankush Agarwal Vs the Official Liquidator Jharkhand High Court

Prahlad Mahto and Ors. Vs Collectariate

Shashi Kant Pandey Vs Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. through Its Managing Director

Ritesh Ranjan and Ors. Vs Human Resources Department

Satish Kumar Lakhmani Alias Satish Lakhmani Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.