JUDGMENT :

Mitali Thakuria, J.

Heard Mr. S. Tapin, learned Senior Govt. Advocate appearing for the appellants, along with Mr. D. Kamduk, learned standing counsel for Land Management Department. Also heard Mr. D. Das, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. R.B. Phukan and Mr. S. Mow, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 47 and Mr. M. Kato, learned D.S.G.I., appearing for the proforma respondent no. 48.

2. By this intra-court appeal, the State has assailed the impugned judgment and order dated 13.06.2022, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 175(AP)/2022 – Manakso Taflap & 47 others v. The State of Arunachal Pradesh & Ors. The connected interlocutory application has been filed with a prayer to stay the operation of the said judgment and order.

Case of the petitioners in the writ petition:

3. The land of the respondent nos. 1 to 47 was acquired for construction of defence road from Chaglagam to Rocham (0.00 km to 6.5 km) in Anjaw District. Pursuant to order dated 09.10.2017, the Board formed by the Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Hayuliang, Anjaw District had carried out Joint survey and property assessment from 0.00 km to 6.5 km of the then PMGSY road between Chaglagam (also spelt as Chaglongam) to Taflagam was carried out on 30.12.2017 and 31.12.2017 in the presence of the owners of land and property. On account of the five items as mentioned in the Joint survey and property assessment report dated 25.09.2019, being (1) Civil construction, buildings, structure, etc.; (2) Horticulture and agriculture related claims; (3) Land management related claims; (4) Land (muck disposal); and (5) Horticulture (muck disposal), assessment of compensation was made at Rs.27,81,61,725/- (Rupees Twenty seven crore eighty one lakh sixty one thousand seven hundred and twenty five only). In the meanwhile, vide letter dated 29.10.2020, the 48 BRTF had informed the Deputy Commissioner, Anjaw District about deposit of said compensation money in their bank account.

4. As there was delay in payment of compensation, the respondent nos. 1 to 47 as writ petitioners, filed W.P.(C) 21(AP)/2021, and this Court by order dated 28.01.2021, directed the Deputy Commissioner, Anjaw, Hayuliang (respondent no. 3) to dispose of the representation of the petitioners within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of the order, with liberty to the respondent nos. 1 to 47 to approach the Court again if they are dissatisfied. Alleging non compliance of the said order, the respondent nos. 1 to 47 filed a contempt petition, which was registered as Cont. Case (C) 17/2021.

5. Thereafter, the proposal for the award was sent to the Land Management Department, who raised objection towards rates assessed for certain items vide order dated 24.06.2021. Accordingly, the Deputy Commissioner, Anjaw informed the respondent nos. 1 to 47 that the compensation could not be released because of objection to rates of certain items of compensation and reference was made to OM No. LM-134/2011 (Pt-III) dated 02.05.2021. Thus, the said order dated 24.06.2021 was challenged before this Court by filing W.P.(C) No. 240(AP)/2021. The said writ petition was allowed by order dated 04.04.2022. The operative part of the said order is quoted below:-

“4. The entire stand of the Deputy Commissioner, Anjaw District is unacceptable inasmuch as the land of the petitioners had already been taken possession by the acquiring department. The acquiring department had deposited whatever amount is required to be deposited. There further remain any issues with the Deputy Commissioner not to disburse the amount to the actual land owners by merely raising issues, one sending it down to the Additional Deputy Commissioner for doing needful and then again blaming the Government for not making approval. If there is any requirement of law to act in such manner the same should be done at the earliest and the respondents by not doing their needful cannot make it to be a basis not to make the payments. The