JUDGMENT :

(N.Tagia, J)

1. Heard Mr. R. Saikia, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. K. Ete, learned Advocate General(In-charge) for the State of Arunachal Pradesh, representing respondent No.1 and Mr. P. K. Tiwari, learned Senior Counsel for the National Hydro Power Corporation Ltd.(NHPC), representing respondent No.2.

2. This Intra-Court Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 11.05.2022, passed by the learned Single Judge in the writ petition being WP(C) No.60(AP)2022.

3. The appellants, altogether 15(fifteen) in numbers, who were part of the 116 writ petitioners, had preferred WP(C) No.60(AP)2022, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a direction to the respondent No.1, the Land Acquisition Collector-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Dibang Valley District, Anini, to disburse the compensation amount to the writ petitioners, so deposited by the National Hydro Power Corporation Ltd.(in short “NHPC Ltd.”), by allowing them to withdraw the same under protest, in terms of Section 77 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013(hereinafter the “Act of 2013” for short).

4. The appellants/writ petitioners’ case before the learned Single Judge was that the petitioners’ land was acquired for 2800 MW Dibang Valley Multipurpose Hydro-Electric Project, for which an award in respect of all beneficiaries including the petitioners was passed to the extent of Rs.1601,39,31,725/-(Rupees One thousand six hundred one crore thirty nine lakh thirty one thousand seven hundred twenty five only), which was approved by the Deputy Commissioner, Dibang Valley District, Anini, vide order dated 07.09.2018. The approval of the award by the State Government was conveyed vide letter dated 18.02.2018. Later on, the State had rescinded and/or cancelled the award vide order dated 20.12.2019. By an order dated 24.03.2020, the State Government, however, had withdrawn the order dated 20.12.2019. While some of the project affected persons had challenged the order dated 20.12.2019, the legality of the award was assailed by the NHPC Ltd., i.e., the respondent No.2.

5. The appellants along with other petitioners in the writ petition, had contended that the State authorities including the Deputy Commissioner, together with the NHPC Ltd. had devised a strategy of delaying disbursement of compensation and whoever had approached the authorities for compensation were asked to sign a compromise agreement not to claim the awarded amount and thereafter, the part-payment of compromise amount was made. It was contended that out of the award for an amount of approximately Rs.1601.39 crore, the respondent No.2, NHPC Ltd. had deposited only about Rs.640.00 crore. It was further contended that the respondent authorities were not making payment of any money to those award holders, who were not submitting themselves to accept the compromise amount. The appellants along with other petitioners further contended that since the NHPC Ltd. had deposited a sum of Rs.640.00 crore, the appellants had an indefeasible right to collect their proportionate share of award under protest. The appellants/writ petitioners, thus, essentially contended before the learned Single Judge that the appellants have been discriminated by the State authorities in not releasing their proportionate share of compensation, while the same has been released to those, who had signed the compromise agreement. Under the aforesaid circumstances, a direction was sought for, to the State authorities to allow the appellants/writ petitioners to receive their proportionate share of compensation under protest, in terms of Section 77 of the Act of 2013.

6. Resisting the prayer of the appellants/writ petitioners, the State in the counter-affidavit filed had, firstly, contended that the State authorities have a right to have