Back
2024 Supreme(Gau) 1444
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT(THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM: NAGALAND:: MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
Ananta Roy and 7 Ors. – Appellant
Versus
The State of Assam and 5 Ors. - Respondents
WP(C) No.4266/2024
Decided on : 28-08-2024
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. SK Talukdar, Mr. JMA Choudhury
For the Respondent: Ms. G Hazarika, Mr. BJ Talukdar, Mr. D Gogoi, Ms. R Borah
IMPORTANT POINT
Statutory authorities must exercise their powers independently, without external influence, and adhere to the law when making decisions regarding land reclassification and compensation.
Headnote:
(A) Assam Agricultural Land (Regulation of Reclassification and Transfer for Non-Agricultural Purpose) Act, 2015 - Sections 2(a), 2(b), 4, 5; National Highway Act, 1956 - Sections 3A, 3C, 3D, 3G - Writ petitions challenging the order of reclassification of land and subsequent notifications issued under the National Highway Act. The court found the order dated 08.01.2024 arbitrary and suffering from malice in law, as it was passed without due consideration of the statutory provisions and recommendations of the District Level Committee. The court emphasized that statutory authorities must exercise their powers independently without external influence. The petitioners were granted liberty to submit claims regarding compensation based on the correct classification of their land. (Paras 21, 28, 30)
(B) Administrative Law - Exercise of statutory powers - Statutory authorities must act within the confines of the law and cannot be influenced by extraneous considerations. (Paras 18, 19)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners applied for reclassification of their agricultural land under the Act of 2015. Their applications were cancelled based on a communication from NHIDCL, which raised concerns about potential manipulation for higher compensation. The court examined the legality of the cancellation and subsequent notifications under the National Highway Act.
Findings of Court:
The order dated 08.01.2024 was set aside for being arbitrary and not in accordance with the law. The petitioners were allowed to pursue claims for compensation based on the correct classification of their land.
Issues: Whether the cancellation of the reclassification applications was justified and whether the notifications under the National Highway Act were valid.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the District Commissioner acted improperly by relying on external communications rather than statutory provisions and recommendations. The authority must exercise its discretion independently.
Result: Writ petitions disposed of with directions for reconsideration of compensation claims.
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. SK Talukdar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. Also heard Mr. BJ Talukdar, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the District Administration, as well as the competent authority. Ms. G Hazarika the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent No.1, Mrs. R Borah, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the NHIDCL in WP(C)No.4266/2024 & WP(C)No.4296/2024 and Mr. D Gogoi, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the NHIDCL in WP(C)No.201/2024 & WP(C)No.203/2024 respectively.
2. All the four writ petitions are taken up for disposal, taking into account that WP(C)No.201/2024 and WP(C)No.203/2024 have come up for admission before this Court and the pleadings are duly complete and WP(C)No.4266/2024 and WP(C)No.4296/2024, though, have come up before this Court for the first time, but being intrinsically connected with the subject matter of WP(C)No.201/2024 and WP(C)No.203/2024 and any order passed in WP(C)No.201/2024 and WP(C)No.203/2024 would effect the outcome of the WP(C)No.4266/2024 and WP(C)No.4296/2024.
3. The petitioners in both WP(C)No.201/2024 and WP(C)No.203/2024 had applied for reclassification of the land in terms of the Assam Agricultural Land (Regulation of Reclassification and Transfer for Non- Agricultural Purpose) Act, 2015 (for short, the Act of 2015). It is stated that they initially applied manually, but subsequently, in the month of December, 2023 applied through the online portal. Mr. SK Talukdar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, submitted that in the manual mode as per his instruction(s), the applications were filed in the early part of 2023. Subsequently, the petitioners were asked to submit the applications through the online portal and as such, the petitioners have again applied in the online mode in the month of December 2023. The said submission is a question of fact. However, from the records, it is seen that the Circle Officer of Nilambazar had proposed the reclassification of the lands belonging to the petitioners along with others on the basis of the Zonal Valuation proposed to the Government for approval vide a communication dated 12.07.2023. It is also seen from the records produced that on 20.12.2023, in the minutes of the meeting of the District Level Committee regarding reclassification of land, recommendations were made that the petitioners’ land along with others be reclassified from the class Shailura to Shilpajat.
4. The records further reveal that on 02.01.2024, the Deputy General Manager (P) NHIDCL issued a communication to the District Commissioner, Karimganj. The subject mentioned in the said communication was “Status of Land for Publication in 3A Notification – Reg.”
5. The contents of the said letter is very relevant. It was mentioned therein that NHIDCL was undertaking 4-laning of Badarpur – Churaibari Section of NH-08 and land acquisition for the same was under progress. It has also been mentioned that it had come to the notice of the Deputy General Manager (P) of the NHIDCL that commercial diversion/change in class of several lands had taken place till date and there was a very high probability that land owners might have intentionally applied for change of land classification for obtaining higher compensation. It was also mentioned that as per the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in several judgments, such motivated transactions are not to be considered for compensation purpose.
It is pertinent herein to take note of that in the said communication, it was mentioned that the survey in Karimganj district had commenced from 15.09.2023 and the stakeholder meeting was held on 21.09.2023. The District Commissioner, Karimganj was, therefore, requested not to consider any change in the classification of the land, for which, application had been made by the land owners on or after 15.09.2023.
6. On the basis of the communication dated 02.01.2024, all the 19 applications which were filed, seeking recl
