Point of Law : while considering the words, 'other cause of like nature', to the effect that Section 14 of the Limitation Act is wide enough to cover such cases where defects are not merely jurisdictional strictly so called but others more or less neighbours to such deficiencies.

JUDGMENT :

MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.

1. Heard Mr. M.A. Sheikh, learned counsel for the petitioners; Mr. K. Goswami, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 1, 5, 6 and 7 and Mr. T.J. Mahanta, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. P. Bhattacharjee, learned Standing Counsel, Assam Electricity Grid Corporation Limited (AEGCL) for the respondent nos. 2-4.

2. At the inception, the learned counsel for the parties have submitted that the Assam State Electricity Board, which is arrayed as the respondent no. 8 in the writ petition, is not a necessary party in this proceeding. In view of such submission made by the learned counsel for the parties, the name of the respondent no. 8 be striked off from the array of respondents.

3. The petitioners have approached this Court by this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction in the nature of mandamus to the respondent authorities to pay an amount of Rs. 1,06,00,000/- to the petitioners towards Zirat compensation and other damages caused to the land belonging to the petitioners due to installation of a 132 K.V. Power Grid line over the land of the petitioners.

4. The case projected on behalf of the petitioners in this writ petition is, in brief, that one Umesh Chandra Mistry was the landowner of a plot of land measuring 12 Bighas 4 Kathas 6 Lessas, covered by Dag Nos. 862 and 864 and Periodic Patta Nos. 268 and 287, situated at Village - Karara Garbhitar, Mouza - Panduri, District - Kamrup (‘the subject-plot’ for convenience). The petitioners are the legal heirs of Umesh Chandra Mistry (since deceased). After the death of the original landowner, Umesh Chandra Mistry, the petitioners are enjoying the possession of the subject-plot without any disturbance by constructing their dwelling houses thereon.

5. According to the petitioners, they have planted valuable trees like Segun, Sishu, Khokan, Ahat, bamboo, etc. and some valuable fruit bearing trees like mango, banana, jackfruits, litchi, betel nuts, coconut, tal, etc. over the subject-plot but the respondent authorities in the AEGCL while constructing the transmission line, had cut down those trees. As a result, the petitioners have suffered considerable economic loss.

6. According to the petitioners, the respondent authorities while cutting down the trees did not follow the procedure contained in the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. It is the case of the petitioners that the respondent authorities without giving any prior notice to the petitioners, entered into the subject-plot and started the survey in the month of December, 2014. The petitioners submitted an application before the respondent no. 7 on 10.09.2014 seeking due compensation towards Zirat and damages caused to the subject-plot. The petitioners also served a legal notice dated 21.10.2014 upon the respondent no. 4 in that connection.

7. The respondent authorities in the AEGCL have submitted an affidavit-in-opposition traversing the contentions of the petitioners in the writ petition.

8. Mr. T.J. Mahanta, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent AEGCL authorities has submitted that the respondent AEGCL authorities had exercised the Right of Way for the purpose of stringing a 220 KV, D/C transmission line from 220 KV Salakati Grid S/S Salakati to 132 KV Grid Sub-Station at Rangia. The transmission line has been installed over the subject-plot and also a number of other plots of land and for that purpose, the respondent authorities had exercised the Right of Way under the provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 read with the Electricity Act, 2003. As such, the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 are not applicable. The respondent authorities have duly assessed the compensation after a joint survey conducted by the District Administration and the officials of the respondent authorities in the AEGCL in presence of the petitioners. After the joint survey, a sum of Rs. 6,47,696/- has been assess