Disposed

Rajesh Kumar Mourya v. the State of Jharkhand through District Land Acquisition Officer

Jharkhand HC11 Jan 2021WPC/2521/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought quashing of an order refusing jurisdiction under the Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act. The High Court directed the District Land Acquisition Officer to refer the land dispute to the competent Principal Civil Court under Section 3-H(4) of the National Highways Act, 1956 within one month and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent State to refer the matter to the concerned Principal Civil Court under Section 3-H(4) of the National Highways Act, 1956 within one month.

Rajesh Kumar Mourya Vs the State of Jharkhand through… — Land Acquisition | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 2521 of 2019

¶3

Rajesh Kumar Mourya

¶4

… … Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

1. The State of Jharkhand through District Land Acquisition Officer, Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum

¶7

1. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum 3. Sunil Kumar Murmu … … Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶9

----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Pratyush Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent-State : Mr. Ashish Kr Thakur, AC to AAG-III -----

¶10

Order No. 04 Dated: 11.01.2021

¶11

The present writ petition is taken up today through Video conferencing.

¶12

The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 28.01.2019 passed by the Authority (Kolhan Division) under Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act-cumPrincipal District Judge, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa in Land Acquisition Case No. 01 of 2017, whereby the said court has refused to exercise its jurisdiction under law and has illegally returned the reference to the respondent no. 2 – the District Land Acquisition Officer, Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum. Further prayer has been made for issuance of direction upon the State respondents to make reference under Section 3-H(4) of the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act, 1956”) before the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction within the limits of whose jurisdiction the land concerned is situated.

¶13

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent no. 2 while invoking Section 3-H(4) of the Act, 1956 wrongly referred the dispute in relation to the land in question to the Principal District Judge, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa-cum-Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority, Kolhan vide letter no. 304/LA dated 17.05.2017, which led to issuance of the impugned order dated 28.01.2019 passed by the Principal District Judge, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa in Land Acquisition Case No. 01/2017 observing inter alia that the said referred case cannot be

¶14

¶15

tried by the said court and hence, the case record was returned to the respondent no. 2 for further action. It is further submitted that due to the laches on the part of the respondent no. 2, the petitioner has unnecessarily been made to suffer as the adjudication with regard to the original claim of compensation in lieu of acquisition of the land in question has been delayed.

¶16

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of prayer made in the present writ petition, the respondent no. 2 is directed to take appropriate steps for referring the matter to the concerned Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction under Section 3-H(4) of the Act, 1956 within one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

¶17

4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with aforesaid direction.

¶18

Manish

Rajesh Kumar Mourya v. the State of Jharkhand through District Land Acquisition Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar Mourya v. the State of Jharkhand through District Land Acquisition Officer

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

Vijay Kumar Sharma Vs Bodhraj Sharma

Bhim Munda Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mantu Modak Vs Fatik Chandra Modak

Ms Vinod Kumar Jain Through Its Partner Vinod Kumar Jain Vs Road Construction

Dr Mohan Jha Vs the State of Jharkhand through Inspector General of Registration

Kishore Kumar Sahu Vs the State of Jharkhand through Its Pr Secretary Deptt of Rural Development