Allowed

Gosai Mohan Jamatia v. the State of Tripura and Ors.

Tripura HC10 Aug 2017WP(C)/995/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought a restraining order against respondents interfering with his land possession due to apprehensions regarding a proposed government school. The court held the petition was premature but directed that possession shall not be disturbed without due legal process.

What did the court decide?

Direction that possession of petitioner's land under Khatians No. 132 and 371 shall not be disturbed without due process of law.

Gosai Mohan Jamatia Vs the State of Tripura and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Tripura HC (2017)

¶1

THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA

¶2

WP(C) NO.995 OF 2017

¶3

Shri Gosai Mohan Jamatia,

¶4

Son of Late Jugal Sadhan Jamatia, resident of village-Doluma, P.O. Malbassa, P.S. Birganj, District-Gomati, Tripura, Pin-799101.

¶5

………… Petitioner

¶6

- Vs –

¶7

1. The State of Tripura,

¶8

represented by the Secretary to the Government of Tripura in the Revenue Department, Civil Secretariat, New Capital Complex, P.O. Kunbaban, P.S. New Capital Complex, District-West Tripura.

¶9

2. The District Magistrate & Collector,

¶10

Gomati District, Udaipur, P.O. & P.S. Radhakishorepur, Udaipur.

¶11

3. The Sub-Division Magistrate,

¶12

Amarpur Sub-Division, P.O. & P.S. Birganj, District-Gomati, Tripura.

¶13

4. The Tehsildar,

¶14

Malbassa Tehsil Office, P.O. Malbassa, P.S. Birganj, District-Gomati, Tripura.

¶15

………… Respondents

¶16

BEFORE

¶17

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA

¶18

For the petitioner : Mr. A.K. Bhowmik, Sr. Advocate Mr. R. Dutta, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. G.S. Bhattacharjee, Advocate Date of hearing & delivery of : 10.08.2017 judgment and order Whether Fit for Reporting : Yes No √

¶19

Page 1 of 4

¶20

WP(C) NO.995 OF 2017

¶21

JUDGMENT & ORDER(ORAL)

¶22

Heard Mr. A.K. Bhowmik, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. R. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. G.S. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶23

2. By means of this petition, the petitioner has urged this Court for restraining the respondents from interfering with the peaceful possession of the petitioner over the land measuring 4.44 acre pertaining to Khatians No.132 and 371, Plots No.915, 916 and 917 of Mouja Purba Daluma under Tehsil Malbassa, Gomati District.

¶24

3. The petitioner has become apprehensive as some Government officials have repeatedly visited his land and entered inside the boundary without his permission. Further, he has heard that a proposal for establishment of a Government school has been approved and he is further apprehensive as he heard that the said school might be set up over his land where the rubber plantation of five years old is standing.

¶25

4. Mr. Bhowmik, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the land, as stated is recorded in the record of rights being Khatian No.132 and Khatian No.371( Annexure-1 and 2 of the writ petition).

¶26

5. From perusal of the khatians it appears that under Column 6 the petitioner has been recorded as the allottee. This writ petition, according to this Court, is entirely premature. If some

¶27

Page 2 of 4

¶28

WP(C) NO.995 OF 2017

¶29

Government officers had entered that might not alone create any cause of apprehension. However, if the respondents do have any plan of setting up of any school over the land of the petitioner, it is needless to say, they can only come into possession on observing the due process of law. Without observing the due process of law, the Government officers are not supposed to interfere with the possession of the petitioner’s land.

¶30

6. Mr. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has submitted that such apprehension has no ground. At the same time, he has submitted that if the land is required for setting up of any school, the respondents shall definitely follow the acquisition process or acquire the same by any other means as permitted by law.

¶31

7. In view of the statement made by Mr. Bhattacharjee, this writ petition is disposed of with the following direction:

¶32

Without following the due process of law, the possession of the petitioner over the land as recorded under Khatians No. 132 and 371 of Mouja Purba Daluma under Tehsil Malbassa shall not be disturbed in any manner. However, the said restraint shall be restricted only to the land recorded under those Khatians as mentioned above.

¶33

8. There shall be no order as to cost.

¶34

Page 3 of 4

¶35

WP(C) NO.995 OF 2017

¶36

9. A copy of this order be furnished to Mr. G.S.

¶37

Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

JUDGE

Nihar

Page 4 of 4

WP(C) NO.995 OF 2017

Gosai Mohan Jamatia v. the State of Tripura and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gosai Mohan Jamatia v. the State of Tripura and Ors.

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

Rajib Sinha Vs Chamaki Sinha

Rikta Pal Sarkar Vs Milan Pal

Hena Rani Das Vs the State of Tripura and Ors.

Khagendra Ch. Deb Vs the State of Tripura and Ors.

Rajmohan Debnath Vs the State of Tripura and Ors.

Rakhal Ch. Das Vs the State of Tripura and Ors.