IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) AT ITANAGAR BENCH
ROBIN PHUKAN, J.
Shri Joram Anu S/o Shri Joram Son – Appellant
Versus
The State Of A.P. – Respondent
WP(C) 476 OF 2014
Decided on : 01-11-2021
Constitution of India-Article 226- Cancellation of LPC – Without opportunity of hearing – Violation of fundamental rights - Deputy Commissioner passed the impugned order without affording an opportunity of being heard.
Finding of the Court:
Having not been heard the writ petitioner, before passing the impugned order, the Deputy Commissioner has violated the principle of natural justice i.e. 'audi alteram pertam' and resultantly, violated the right of the petitioner, as guaranteed by Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
Result: Petition allowed
JUDGMENT :
This writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is preferred by Shri Joram Anu, son of Shri Joram Son of Yachuli, Lower Subansiri District challenging the correctness or otherwise of the order, No.LMZ/T/Highway-1/2011, dated 30.09.2014, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Lower Subansiri District, Ziro. It is to be mentioned here that vide impugned order, the learned Deputy Commissioner, Lower Subansiri District, Ziro has cancelled the LPC, granted to the petitioner earlier, without hearing him.
2. The factual background, necessary for proper appreciation of the dispute in the case in hand, is adumbrated here in below:-
While disposing of the writ petition of the petitioner, this Court directed that the respondent authorities may approach the matter afresh after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. And then the petitioner submitted an application dated 04.08.2014, to the Deputy Commissioner, Ziro for assessment of his land for acquisition of his Trans-Arunachal Highway which is passing through the land of the petitioner and the payment of the proper compensation thereof. However, the petitioner did not receive any communication from the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Ziro. Then he waited for issuance of proper notice to him before proceeding any further with the cancellation of the LPC. However, he received a copy of the order No.LMZ/T/Highway-1/2011 dated 30.09.2014, on 26.11.2014, wherein, it was stated that on 11.08.2014, the representation filed by him for assessment of his land for Trans-Arunachal Highway was taken up along with the complaints filed by some persons for cancellation of the LPC of the petitioner and 13 other persons. And notices were issued to the petitioners in WP(C) No.93-98(AP)/2012, to appear before the Deputy Commissioner, Ziro on 11.08.2014 and notices were duly communicated to the petitioner in the aforesaid writ petitions and it was also revealed that Shri Toko Puna and the petitioner in WP(C) No.93-98(AP)/2012 represented all other petitioners and after hearing him, the complainants and the Department officials, the LPC of the petitioner along with the 13 others have been cancelled. It was also stated that the petitioner never received any notice from the Deputy Commissioner, Ziro and he never attended the said hearing before the Deputy Commissioner in his office. And thereafter, the petitioner preferred one application before the Deputy Commissioner to furnish a copy of the complaint letter against his LPC, notice/call letter issued to the petitioner for hearing, minutes of proceeding and attendance sheet, if any, of
A. K. Kraipak v. Union of India. (1969) 2 SCC 262
Smt. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India
Mohinder Singh Gill v. Election Commission of India: (1978) 1 SCC 405
Smt. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India
Cancellation of LPC – Opportunity of hearing not given – Hence cancellation not justified.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the cancellation of a mutation must adhere to the principles of natural justice and statutory provisions, and the authority reviewing the muta....
The Deputy Commissioner's actions were found to be in compliance with the MLR & LR Act and Rules, and substantial compliance with the principles of natural justice. The court declined to interfere wi....
The court ruled that the Deputy Commissioner violated natural justice by restoring the LPC without proper hearings, emphasizing the binding nature of prior findings affirming ownership.
The cancellation of the Land Possession Certificate without an opportunity to the petitioner constitutes a violation of the principles of natural justice, warranting the order's reversal.
Point of law: Every appeal preferred after expiry of period specified in Sec. 5-A, of Act shall be accompanied by a separate application for condonation of delay supported by an affidavit sworn to by....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.