Disposed

Rambhawati Devi and Anr. v. Water Resources Departement

Jharkhand HC8 Feb 2023WPC/5502/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought compensation for land used for the Raisa Jalashay Project without payment. The Court directed them to approach the Special Land Acquisition Officer with the order within eight weeks, ensuring relief based on the respondents' affidavit stating funds are available.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to approach Respondent No. 4 with the writ records and this order to claim compensation within eight weeks.

Rambhawati Devi and Anr. Vs Water Resources Departement — Land Acquisition | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 5502 of 2012

¶3

1 (a) Rambhawati Devi, W/o late Fani Bhushan Munda 1 (b) Pradeep Singh Munda S/o late Fani Bhushan Munda Both residents of village – Humta, P.O. Humta, P.S. Bundu, District - Ranchi … … Petitioners

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand 2. The Secretary, Water Resource Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi

¶6

The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi

¶7

The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Middle Irrigation Project, Ranchi.

¶8

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Irrigation Sub-Division, Bundu, P.O. & P.S. – Bundu, District – Ranchi

¶9

The Circle Officer, Bundu, P.O. & P.S. – Bundu, District – Ranchi 7. Superintendent Engineer, Jalpatu Circle, Jal Bhawan, P.O.& P.S. – Doranda, District Ranchi

¶10

Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Bundu, Jal Bhawan, P.O. & P.S. – Doranda, District - Ranchi … … Respondents

¶11

¶12

CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

¶13

--For the Petitioners : Mr. Himanshu Kumar Mehta, Adv. : Ms. Manjushri Patra, Advocate : Ms. Shreshtha Mehta, Advocate : Mr. Vidhan Kr. Singh, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Ratnesh Kumar, S.C. (L&C) I : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Shahi, A.C. to S.C. (L&C) I

¶14

¶15

12 /08.02.2023 Learned counsel for the parties are present.

¶16

2. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:

¶17

“For a direction upon the respondents for paying the compensation for the land acquired for Raisa Jalashay Project, wherein the land of the village Humta has been acquired by the Government but not a single penny has been paid to the petitioner who happens to be the khuntkattidar of the village.

¶18

And

¶19

For further directing the respondents not to proceed with the said project till the adequate compensation is paid to the petitioner, who is the khuntkattidar and the other Raiyats of the village whose land have been acquired by the Government, for the project of Raisa Dam.”

¶20

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the writ petition

¶21

was filed as back as in the year 2012 and in the meantime, the new Act namely the Right of Fair compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement Act, 2013 came into effect and thus, the entire process, which was done in terms of the earlier provision of acquisition of land got vitiated and fresh process was issued in terms of new Act. He also submits that property of the petitioners was utilized for making construction for the respondents

¶22

¶23

and the petitioner has been dispossessed, but no compensation has been paid to the petitioners.

¶24

4. Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that a number of counter-affidavits have been filed in the present case and as per the last counter-affidavit dated 22.11.2022, appropriate directions have been issued and in terms of such direction if the petitioner approaches the respondent no.4, his grievance will be redressed.

¶25

5. In response, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that appropriate direction be passed so that the petitioners may approach the respondent no.4 for claiming compensation.

¶26

6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that though a number of counter affidavits have been filed in the present case, but lastly an affidavit dated 22.11.2022 has been filed by Mr. Upendra Kumar Singh, the Under Secretary, Water Resources Department and a specific statement been made in para 5 of the aforesaid affidavit is quoted as under:

¶27

“5. That the answering respondent most humbly and respectfully submits that upon receipt of the order of this Hon’ble Court, an urgent high level meeting was called upon by the department Secretary on this issue wherein after discussing every aspect of the matter it was found that as the entire process relating to obtaining fresh administrative approval of this project is an interdepartmental issue, it is difficult for the answering respondent to fix any timeline for the same.

¶28

In such circumstances, taking note of the concern of this Hon’ble Court and also taking note of the fact that though, the work was undertaken by the constructor with consent of the original writ petitioner, but the fact remained that he has been dispossessed from some part of his land and till date no compensation could be paid to him due to the prevailing circumstances. In such circumstances, in light of the decision taken in the high level meeting, vide departmental letter no.5778 dated 18.11.2022, a direction has been given to the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Ranchi, to take immediate steps for making payment of compensation to the petitioner by acquiring such land of the petitioner which has been utilized till now and from which the petitioner has been dispossessed. Further, it has also been directed by the said letter that the fund of Rs.19,83,68,000/- which was initially made available to the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Ranchi, for this project be used for this purpose and if require, more fund shall be made available upon such requisition.”

¶29

7. Considering the aforesaid averments made, this writ petition is disposed of enabling the petitioners to approach the respondent no.4 by filing a representation along with the writ records and a copy of this order. Upon filing of such representation, the respondent no.4 is directed to do the needful with regard to the claim of the petitioners in accordance in the light of the aforesaid statements made by the Under Secretary, Water Resources Department and in terms of the applicable

¶30

¶31

law within a period of eight weeks from the date of filing of such representation. This Court has not entered into the merits of the entitlement or otherwise of the claim of the petitioners.

¶32

8. Pending interlocutory application, if any, is dismissed as not pressed.

¶33

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

¶34

Saurav/

Rambhawati Devi and Anr. v. Water Resources Departement

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rambhawati Devi and Anr. v. Water Resources Departement

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

Ajit Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Samir Kumar Ghosh and Ors. Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Ratho Karmali Alias Ratho Vishwakarma Vs District Administration

Deepak Prasad Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Laxmi Enterprises through Its Proprietor Narottam Das Vs State of Jharkhand

Kohinoor Stel Pvt. Ltd. through Its Manager Corporate Affairs Sri Prabir Kumar Ghosh Vs Mines and Geological Survey