IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNCHAL PRADESH) AIZAWL BENCH: AIZAWL
MARLI VANKUNG, J.
Shri C. Lalniliana S/o Saichhawna
Versus
The State of Mizoram – Respondent
WP (C) No. 91 of 2018
Decided on : 11-03-2022
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 14, 226, 300A - Mizoram (Land Revenue) Act,2013 - Section 14 (1) – Equality before Law – Power of High court to issue writs - Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India for declaring null and void notifications issued by Principal Secretary to Government of Mizoram - Revenue Department, which in exercise of the power conferred under subsection (1) of section 14 of the Mizoram (Land Revenue) Act,2013 restricts settlement within a plot of land covering 'Bawngkawn Brigade Area' by declaring same as restricted area for special purposes and for public use - Whether passes/land settlement certificates possessed by petitioners are valid or not - Whether petitioners are holders of valid Passes/Land Settlement Certificate within Phase-I area of Bawngkawn Brigade area and thereafter respondents are to do the needful as per law - Scope of judicial review when examining a policy of Government is to check whether it violates the fundamental rights of the citizens or is opposed to the provisions of the Constitution, or opposed to any statutory provision or manifestly arbitrary. (Para 10)
Findings of the Court :
Court finds no reason to interfere with the decision of the Government in issuing the notification, which, in exercise of the power conferred under sub-section (1) of section 14 of the Mizoram (Land Revenue) Act,2013 restricts settlement within a plot of land covering 'Bawngkawn Brigade Area' by declaring the same as restricted area for special purposes and for public use, and the subsequent order, which modified the aforesaid Notification dated 30th July 2013, whereby the scope of restriction of the notification would cover only Phase-I area and lifted the restriction of Phase -II area - Court also find that the claim of the petitioners that the passes/land Settlement certificates possessed by them within the Phase-I of the Bawngkawn brigade area are valid passes since they have been paying revenue tax till date and that their right under Article 300A has been violated not sustainable.
Result : Writ petition disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. T.Lalnunsiama learned counsel for the petitioners and also heard Mr. Zoramchhana learned Addl. Advocate General appearing for the state respondents.
2] This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for declaring null and void the notifications issued by the Principal Secretary to the Government of Mizoram. Revenue Department, vide No. C.18016/39/2001-REV, dated 30th July, 2013 which in exercise of the power conferred under subsection (1) of section 14 of the Mizoram (Land Revenue) Act, 2013 restricts settlement within a plot of land covering ‘Bawngkawn Brigade Area’ by declaring the same as restricted area for special purposes and for public use, and the subsequent order No.K.15011/141/2018- REV/Vol-I/19 dated 2nd August 2018, which modified the aforesaid Notification dated 30th July 2013, wherein the scope of restriction of the notification dated 30th July 2013 would cover only Phase-I area and lifted the restriction of Phase –II area. That the said notifications were in violation of Article 14 and Article 300A of the Constitution.
3] Having heard both the parties and from perusal of the documents available on record, a brief the background of the events leading to this writ petition is highlighted herein: Previously during the insurgency in the state, certain areas of land were occupied by the security forces and declared as protected area. The petitioners claim is that they are the land owners of such the landed property situated at Bawngkawn Brigade area which was previously occupied by Security Forces in the year 1966 till 09.09.2008. The Security Force/Defence Department, Union of Indian then de-hired the area and handed over the Bawngkawn Brigade Area to the Collector & Deputy Commissioner, Aizawl District. Thereafter, in 2001, a PIL was filed before the Gauhati High Court by the then Village Council of Bawngkawn represented by its President, for the State authorities to enquire into the matter of alleged illegal/irregular allotments of land made in the mentioned Bawngkawn Brigade Area. The PIL was registered as W.P.(C) 52/2001 and the Court in its order dated 14.05.2003 closed the PIL by directing the State Authority in the Land Revenue & Settlement Department to bring the verification process initiated vide a Notification dated 06.03.2000 to its logical conclusion and to take all consequential measures as may be required in the law. Pursuant thereof, the Principal Secretary to the Government of Mizoram. Revenue Department, issued the impugned Notification vide No. C.18016/39/2001-REV, dated 30th July, 2013 which declared the plot of land covering ‘Bawngkawn Brigade Area’ as assigned for special purposes and for public use such as, establishment of hospital, public utility and other public amenities. Thereafter, the Respondent No. 3 issued a notification vide Memo No.K.15011/141/2014-REV Dated Aizawl, 1stJune, 2015, that in compliance with the Judgment & Order dt.14.05.2003 in W.P.(C) No.52/2001, spot verification was done within the Bawngkawn Brigade area and based on the decision of the Council of Minister in its meeting on 01.12.2011, ordered that (1) the locations of 96 (ninety six) LSCs & House Passes and Residential Land Settlement Certificates within Phase-I area of Bawngkawn Brigade Area should be transferred to other locations as may be deemed suitable by the Government so as to enable the Government to utilize the area so declared as restricted area for public purposes. And, (2) that all Passes issued within the said Bawngkawn Brigade Area (Phase-I) by the Chaltlang ‘S’ Village Council without prior approval of the Executive Committee of the erstwhile Mizo District Council or the Government of Mizoram be declared invalid and all holders of the said category of passes were asked to vacate the land within 45 days from the date of issue of the notification. Aggrieved with the above notification, W.P.(C) No.98 of 2015, W.P.(C) No.105 of 2015, W.P.(C) No.129 of 2015, W.P.(C) N
Directorate of Film Festivals v. GauravAshwin Jain reported in (2007) 4 SCC 737
Faqruddin v. Tajuddin reported in (2008) 8 SCC 12
Suraj Bhan v. Financial Commissioner
Union of India and Others -Vs- J.D. Suryavanshi reported in (2011) 13 SCC 167
Point of Law : Scope of judicial review when examining a policy of the Government is to check whether it violates the fundamental rights of the citizens or is opposed to the provisions of the Constit....
The court ruled that the petitioners could not claim rights over land based on an invalid pass after 95 years, emphasizing the need for formal title proof.
Section 2 of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 deals with restriction on dereservation of forest or use of forest land for non-forest purpose.
The Land Acquisition Officer's failure to independently assess objections vitiates the acquisition process, which must comply with statutory requirements including Section 5A of the Land Acquisition ....
Point of Law : Any order passed by any authority in spite of the knowledge of order of court, is of no consequence as it remains a nullity and any subsequent action thereof would also be a nullity.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the 1960 notification declaring the land as 'reserved forest' was illegal and invalid, and the Bhoodan Committee had no right to transfer the ....
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.