Back
NELSON SAILO
B. Johnson S/o B. Zawhana – Appellant
Versus
Union of India R/b the Secretary, Border Roads Develpment Board, Sena Bhavan 'B' Wing, New Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Nelson Sailo, J.
Heard Ms. Dinari T Azyu, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. Zairemsangpuii, learned CGC for the respondent Union of India. Also heard Ms. Lalnunhlui, learned Government Advocate for the State respondents and Mr. Lalfakawma, learned counsel for the respondent MADC. Both the writ petitions will be disposed of by this common order as the issues involved are similar. In WP(C) No. 60/2023, there are 74 writ petitioners while in WP(C) No. 103/2023, there are 7 writ petitioners.
2. The case of the petitioners is that they are the owners of their respective lands within the Siaha district and the respondent authorities through the BRTF had undertaken the construction of Kawlchaw-Phura-Tongkolong road and that they were not awarded any compensation. This Court, in WP(C) No. 160/2016 & WP(C) No. 224/2016 vide Orders dated 22.09.2016 & 08.12.2018 respectively, had directed the respondent authorities to conduct a spot verification to find out whether road had been constructed through the land of the petitioners and if it was constructed, to prepare a supplementary award for acquisition of the land of the said petitioners. According to the instant petitioners,
Deduction of cess from compensation is illegal; petitioners entitled to interest for delayed compensation.
Compensation for acquired land can include statutory cess deductions as per the Act, confirming the legality of such levies against previous administrative costs.
Payment of solatium and interest under the Land Acquisition Act is a statutory right, and a writ petition can be maintained to enforce this right even if compensation has been accepted.
The Mizoram (Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation & Resettlement) Act, 2016 is not applicable; the Act of 2013 governs land acquisition in Mizoram.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the consent award, the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, and the doctrine of promissory esto....
The court affirmed the obligation of the state to pay compensation for land acquisition as mandated by law, emphasizing the validity of the award and the constitutional right to property.
The assessment of compensation for land acquisition must prioritize the highest market value from relevant sale deeds and apply provisions of newer compensation regulations.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of clarifying disputed questions of fact and doubts on the authenticity of the draft award before seeking any direction for payment ....
Point of Law : It is well settled that if a person has submitted to the jurisdiction of the Authority, he cannot challenge proceedings, on the ground of lack of jurisdiction of said authority in furt....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
