SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Gau) 441

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)
MITALI THAKURIA, J.
Michi Tayang, S/o Late Michi Pai and Ors. – Appellant
Versus
The State Of AP and 5 Ors. – Respondents
WP(C) 359 of 2022
Decided on : 22-03-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Subu Koyang

Headnote:

Constitution of India,1950 - Article 226 - Land Acquisition - Compensation - Calculation - Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Balipara/Tirap/Sadiya Frontier Tract Jhum Land Regulation Act, 1947 - Section 10 - Present writ petition is that Government of Arunachal Pradesh, through Secretary (Land Management), Government of Arunachal Pradesh, issued a public Notification, vide No. LM-14/2014, under Section 10 of Balipara/Tirap/Sadiya Frontier Tract Jhum Land Regulation Act, 1947, expressing their intention to acquire land mentioned in schedule of the said Notification for construction of road - Land of petitioner has also been included in schedule of said Notification for acquisition of land - Whether petitioners are entitled for solatium and interest at rate 100% of compensation amount, as prayed for, under provision of Section 30 of Act of 2013 - whether the present writ petition is barred by law of Limitation – Held, from submissions made by the learned counsels of both sides as well as from entire discussions made hereinabove, it is seen that admittedly there is a delay in filing writ petition seeking direction to concerned authority for payment of interest and solatium - It is seen that there is no such laches and negligence on part of present petitioner in filing present writ petition for payment of solatium and interest - Act of 2013 is very much clear that object of said Act is for protection and the benefits of land owners whose lands have been acquired for any industrialization or construction of highways or any essential infrastructure facilities etc - In view of already settled position of this matter, Court is of view that petitioner of present writ petition is also entitled for compensation and solatium and interest in terms of Act of 2013 - It is admitted position that petitioner has already received his compensation from concerned respondent authority - Writ petition stands disposed of.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. S. Koyang, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. Tapin, learned Senior Government Advocate representing State respondent Nos. 1, 3, 4 & 5; Mr. D. Kamduk, learned Standing Counsel, Land Management Department, representing respondent No. 2 and Mr. M. Kato, learned DSGI representing respondent No. 6.

2. This is an application filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari/mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction of like nature directing the respondent authorities for payment of solatium amount to the petitioners, at the rate of 100% of the compensation amount, under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

3. The brief facts of the present writ petition is that the Government of Arunachal Pradesh, through the Secretary (Land Management), Government of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar, issued a public Notification, vide No. LM-14/2014, dated 17.02.2014, under Section 10 of the Balipara/Tirap/Sadiya Frontier Tract Jhum Land Regulation Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Regulation of 1947’), expressing their intention to acquire land mentioned in the schedule of the said Notification for construction of road from Potin to Bopi via Yazali, Yachuli, Ziro, Boasimla, Tamen and Raga under Trans Arunachal Highway (TAH). The lands of the petitioners have also been included in the schedule of the said Notification for acquisition of land. The Government of Arunachal Pradesh is, accordingly, paying compensation and solatium to the land affected people for acquisition of land as per aforesaid Notification. The Government of Arunachal Pradesh issued one Notification No. LM-134/2011(Pt), dated 28.09.2012, prescribing procedure and manner to be followed, as prescribed under Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for calculation of land compensation including land value, interest, solatium, establishment charge and contingency charge. Thereafter, the Government of Arunachal Pradesh, through the Secretary of Land Management, Itanagar, has issued another Notification, dated 22.01.2016, in suppression of the earlier Notification No. LM-134/2011 (Pt), dated 28.09.2012, wherein, it has been provided for payment of solatium and interest for all kinds of land acquisition. Therefore, the petitioners are entitled for payment of compensation and solatium for the land and properties acquired by the respondents.

4. It is to be mentioned here that the Ministry of Road, Transport & Highways, Government of India, has sanctioned a fund of Rs. 188 Crores vide fund sanction Order No. NH-12012/30/2014/Ar.Pkg/SARDPN-NE, dated 18.05.2017, for payment of compensation to the land affected persons for acquisition of land.

5. It is further stated that on 20.03.2014, the Secretary-cum-Revenue Commissioner, Land Management Department, Government of Arunachal Pradesh, had issued a Notification for extension of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act of 2013’) in the State of Arunachal Pradesh, where in the First Schedule of the said Act, the method of calculation of compensation has been provided, which includes solatium. But the respondent authorities have not applied the aforesaid Table of First Schedule at the time of calculation of compensation to be paid to the petitioners. The respondent authorities have arbitrarily omitted to apply Sl. No. 5 of the aforesaid Table at the time of calculation of compensation in order to deprive payment of solatium to the petitioners. It is further stated that the First Schedule and the Section 30 of the Act of 2013 is applicable in the case of the petitioners and they are entitled to get payment of solatium as provided under the said Act of 2013.

6. It is also stated that the Ministry of Road, Transport & Highways, Government of India, has issued a guideline, vide No.

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

      Please visit our Training & Support
      Center or Contact Us for assistance

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
      whatsapp-icon Back to top