The High Court of Jharkhand disposed of a writ petition seeking directions for land acquisition compensation. The court held that since the compensation dispute was already referred to the Principal District and Sessions Judge under Section 64 of the RFRZ Act, 2013, a writ was unnecessary.
No writ of mandamus was issued; the petition was disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(C) No. 2789 of 2020
Lakhiram Tudu ….. Petitioner
Versus
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
For the Petitioner: Mr. Aman Shekhar For the State: Mr. Ashish Kr. Thakur, A.C to A.A.G-III
05/13.03.2023 The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the
concerned respondents to make payment of appropriate compensation along with interest to the petitioner in lieu of acquisition of his land for the project, namely, ‘Widening and Strengthening of Road from Harinchara to Barhet Shivgadhi’ vide Land Acquisition Case No. 16/2016-17 as mentioned in order dated 06.12.2017 passed in M. P. Case No. 563/2014 by the Court of the respondent No.5 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) in terms with the provisions of the Right to fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act, 2013’].
A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 3, 4, 6 & 7, sworn by the respondent No.4, annexing a copy of the order dated 10.11.2020 passed by the said respondent whereby on an objection raised by the petitioner with respect to payment of compensation for acquisition of the land in question in favour of Solna Tudu (wife of the respondent No.8), the matter has been referred under Section 64 of the Act, 2013 to the Principal District and Sessions Judge-cum-Competent Authority, Santhal Pargana, Dumka. Considering that the dispute raised by the petitioner with respect to preparation of award and payment of compensation for acquisition of the land in
question has already been referred under Section 64 of the Act, 2013 to the Principal District and Sessions Judge-cum-Competent Authority, Santhal Pargana, Dumka, there is no need to issue any writ of mandamus to the concerned respondents as has been prayed by the petitioner in the present writ petition.
The present writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
(RAJESH SHANKAR, J)
Satish/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued when the dispute regarding compensation payment has already been referred under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisiti
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Lakhiram Tudu
The State of Jharkhand
The Commissioner, Santhal Parganas Division, Dumka
The Deputy Commissioner, Sahibganj
The District Land Acquisition Officer, Sahibganj
The Assistant Settlement Officer, Sahibganj
RAJESH SHANKAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
