IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Devashis Baruah, J.
Raj Kumar Singh And S/o- Jugeshwar Singh And Anr. – Petitioners
Versus
The Union Of India And Represented By The Secretary Ministry Of Road Transport Highway, Government Of India, Transport Bhawan 1, Parliament Street, New Delhi And Ors. - Respondents
WP(C)/3676/2024
Decided On : 16-08-2024
Land - Acquisition - National Highways Act, 1956; Assam Agricultural Land (Regulation of Reclassification and Transfer for Non-Agricultural Purpose) Act, 2015 - The Court analyzed the classification of land as agricultural versus commercial, emphasizing the procedural requirements for reclassification under the 2015 Act and the rights to compensation under the 1956 Act.
Fact of the Case:
The Petitioners claimed ownership of lands acquired under the National Highways Act, asserting they were commercial lands, not agricultural, and sought a declaration and compensation accordingly.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the Petitioners failed to provide sufficient evidence to support their claim for reclassification of the land and did not follow the necessary procedures outlined in the relevant acts.
Issues: Whether the lands in question could be reclassified from agricultural to commercial and whether the Petitioners were entitled to compensation based on this classification.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the Petitioners did not meet the statutory requirements for reclassification under the Assam Agricultural Land Act and thus could not claim the lands as non-agricultural.
Result: The writ petition was disposed of, allowing the Petitioners to seek a reference for compensation determination if aggrieved.
JUDGMENT :
Devashis Baruah, J.
Heard Mr. F. Z. Mazumdar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners and Mr. R. K. D. Choudhury, the learned Dy. S.G.I. appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.1. I have also heard Ms. S. Sharma, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 2, 3 & 6 and Mr. R. K. Talukdar, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 4 and 5.
2. The Petitioners herein have filed the instant writ petition seeking a declaration that the lands which have been acquired by the Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 through the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are industrial lands and not agricultural lands and in the alternative seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus for disposal of the representation dated 31.05.2024 which have been submitted to the competent authority i.e. the Respondent No.3.
3. The facts involved in the instant proceedings are that the Petitioner No.1 claims to be the owner and possessor of various plots of land measuring 15 Bighas 11 Kathas 15 Chataks covered by Dag Nos. 17, 18, 20, 12, 14 and 16 of 2nd R.S. Patta No. 8, 12, 13 and 15 situated at Mouza Kazidahar Part-III Porgona Bonraj in the District of Cachar. The Petitioner No.2 also claims to be owner and possessor of various plots of land measuring 17 Bighas 19 Kathas 4 Chataks 10 Gondas covered by Dag Nos. 17, 18, 20, 12, 14 and 16 of 2nd R.S. Patta No. 8, 12, 13 and 15 in the same Mouza and Porgona.
4. From the materials on record, it is seen that on 16.10.2023, the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways had issued a notification under Section 3D of the National Highways Act, 1956 (for short “the Act of 1956”) acquiring various plots of land. In the said notification, some of the portions of the lands of the Petitioners have been shown as acquired. The classification of the lands of the Petitioners have been shown to be agriculture. It is the case of the Petitioners that the said lands are commercial lands and the Respondent Authorities while issuing the notification under Section 3D of the Act of 1956 had committed an error and in support thereof, have placed reliance on the provisional land occupation and status of land certificates issued on 07.08.2019 by the Circle Officer, Sonai Revenue Circle issued separately to both the Petitioners.
5. In addition to that, the Petitioners have also relied upon the order dated 14.09.2022 whereby the Petitioner No.2 has been granted the No Objection by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Cachar to set up a brick kiln industry in the name and style of M/s Priya Brick Industry on the land belonging to the Petitioner No.2. It is the further case of the Petitioners that pursuant to the notification issued under section 3D of the Act of 1956, the Petitioners submitted an application seeking compensation for the acquired land claiming that the compensation should be paid in terms with commercial lands and not agricultural lands. This application was submitted on 31.05.2024 which however, as per the Petitioners have not received any favourable response for which the instant writ petition has been filed.
6. When the matter was listed before this Court on 26.07.2024 and 05.08.2024, this Court enquired as to whether any order has been passed by an authority competent to do so thereby classifying the land of the Petitioners as commercial lands. In that regard, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of this Petitioners submitted that he would file an additional affidavit. Accordingly, an additional affidavit was filed by the Petitioners on 13.08.2024. In the said additional affidavit, the Petitioners have enclosed two revenue receipts. Annexure-A to the said additional affidavit is a revenue receipt dated 17.07.2023 and Annexure-B is a revenue receipt dated the 12.08.2024. The said revenue receipt enclosed as Annexure-B to the additional affidavit is a document which had come into existence pursuant to the filing of the instant writ petition and more particularly, af
AI
The Court established that reclassification of agricultural land requires strict adherence to statutory procedures, and failure to comply negates claims for compensation based on different land class....
Once land is acquired and vests in the state, compensation obligations persist and cannot be negated by later claims of non-utilization.
Point of law: Absence of an award in terms of the provisions of the Act, the reference as made to the L.A.R.R. Authority as was done by the District Level Negotiations Committee would have no legal e....
Valid ownership documentation is essential for claims in land acquisition proceedings under the National Highways Act.
Once Section 3(1) notification is issued recognizing land owners, and registered deeds and pattas remain unassailed, claimants are entitled to compensation and deposit under Section 10(3) cannot be o....
The Tehsildar retains jurisdiction to entertain mutation applications for non-agricultural land even after acquisition notifications under the National Highway Act, and auction proceedings under the ....
The Tehsildar retains jurisdiction over mutation applications for non-agricultural land, even post-acquisition notifications, and auction sales under the Securitisation Act are valid if conducted pri....
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.