Back
THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
NELSON SAILO
Lujon Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Mizoram R/b The Chief Secretary To The Govt. of Mizoram – Respondent
ORDER :
(NELSON SAILO, J.)
[1.] Heard Mr. C Lalramzauva, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. StephenLalbuatsaiha for the petitioners in both the writ petitions. Also heard Mr. Samuel Vanlalhriata Chhangte, learned Addl. Advocate General for the Staterespondents. Ms. Zairemsangpuii, learned CGC for the respondent Union ofIndia and Mr. Roshan Subedi, learned counsel for respondent No. 5 EngineeringProjects (India) Limited (EPIL). Since the issue involved in both the writpetitions are similar, they are being disposed of by this common Jugment &Order.
[2.] The petitioners in both the cases are aggrieved for not having been given solatium and interest in terms of Section 23(1A) & (2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (LA Act) apart from the compensation amount. The petitioners in WP(C) No. 75/2019 were given compensation as per Draft Award No. 3/2009 for acquisition of their land for the purpose of Indo-Bangla Border Road-cum- Fencing. As for the petitioners in WP(C) No. 76/2019, they were given compensation as per Draft Award No. 3/2007 for acquisition of their land for the same purpose. Both set of writ petitioners have however not been g
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.
There is no provision for payment of solatium and interest in Regulation of 1947, whereas same is available in RFCT & LARR Act.
The acquisition process does not lapse under section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation has been tendered to the landowners and possession of the land has been taken by the acquiring authority.
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....
Point of Law : Section 28 empowers the courts, if it was enhancing the compensation awarded by the Collector, to award interest on the sum in excess of what the Collector had awarded as compensation.
The court affirmed the obligation to pay compensation for land acquisition, emphasizing the learned Single Judge's jurisdiction to direct payment when no challenge to the award existed.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the mandatory entitlement to interest on solatium as part of just and fair compensation under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
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
