Disposed

Dilip Kumar Soni v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC1 Mar 2023WPC/5602/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, whose land was acquired for a railway line over 12 years ago without compensation, sought directions. The court, deciding not to examine merits, granted liberty for the petitioner to file a fresh representation to the District Land Acquisition Officer to be disposed within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file fresh representation before Respondent No. 4; direction to decide within eight weeks after hearing.

Dilip Kumar Soni Vs the State of Jharkhand — Specific Performance | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 5602 of 2022

¶3

Dilip Kumar Soni ….. Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand

¶6

The Deputy Commissioner, Chatra

¶7

The Circle Officer, Simaria, Chatra

¶8

The District Land Acquisition Officer, Chatra

¶9

The Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction), East Central Railway, Hazaribagh 6. The Estate Officer, East Central Railway, Hazaribagh ….. Respondents ----- CORAM

¶10

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶11

----For the Petitioner: Mr. Lukesh Kumar For the State: Mr. Krishna Kumar Bhatt, A.C to S.C-I For the Railways: Mr. Prabhat Kumar Sinha, C.G.C

¶12

¶13

04/01.03.2023 The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to make payment of compensation in lieu of acquisition of the petitioner’s land appertaining to Khata No. 60, Plot Nos. 956/28 & 314/3, Mouza-Bargawan, Thana No. 208, P.S-Simaria, measuring an area of 1.20 Acres, District-Chatra for construction of railway line.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the process of acquisition of the said land was initiated in the year 2010 by the respondent authorities for construction of railway line and possession of the same was also taken by them. However, even after lapse of more than 12 years, no compensation for acquisition of the said land as well as the house standing over the same has been paid to the petitioner.

¶15

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of the prayer made in the present writ petition, without entering into the merit of the case, the petitioner is given liberty to prefer a fresh representation on the present issue before the respondent No.4. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent No.4, after verifying the relevant records and on providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner/his representative, shall take an appropriate informed decision in accordance with law within eight weeks from the date of filing of the representation.

¶16

The present writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid

¶17

liberty and direction.

¶18

(RAJESH SHANKAR, J)

¶19

Satish/-

Dilip Kumar Soni v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilip Kumar Soni 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Siddik Khan Vs Bank of India through Its Zonal Head

C C L Employees Credit Cooperative Society Limited Barkakana Ramgarh through Anuj Kumar Bhushan Vs the State of Jharkhand through Registrar Cooperative Societies Jharkhand

Jaglal Ganjhu Vs the State of Jharkhand Represented through the Deputy Commissioner

Archana Kumari Vs Union of India

M/S Starnet Marketing Pvt. Ltd. through One of Its Director Sri Surendra Kumar Jindal Vs Dhanbad Municipal Corporation through Its Municipal Commissioner

National Federation of Farmers Procurement Processing and Retailing Cooperatives of India Limited Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary