THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Manish Choudhury, J.
Sanjit Debnath Son Of Pramond Debnath - Appellant
Vs.
The State Of Assam And Ors. - Respondent
WP(C)/990/2025
Decided On : 05-03-2025
ORDER :
MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.
Heard Ms. K.L.R. Yanthan, learned counsel for the petitioner; Ms. M. Das, learned Standing Counsel, Public Works Department for the respondent nos. 1 & 5; and Mr. B.J. Talukdar, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. P.K. Medhi, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4.
2. In view of the nature of the issue raised and as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for consideration at the motion stage itself.
3. The petitioner has claimed that he is in occupation of a plot of land, covered by Dag no. 166 [Touzi], situate at Village – Garpara, Dhekiajuli Revenue Circle, District – Sonitpur. The petitioner has stated that the respondent authorities have initiated a process of land acquisition vide L.A. Case no. 03 of 2023 for the purpose of acquiring lands for the project of a road from Kankata to Ghoirali in the district of Sonitpur under the Asom Mala Project.
4. It is stated that the respondent authorities have initiated the process of land acquisition under a scheme, ‘Land acquisition through Direct Purchase by way of negotiated settlement for all Departments in the State of Assam’, as notified by a Notification no. RLA.177/2021/3 dated 07.03.2022 issued by the Revenue & Disaster Management [L.R.] Department, Government of Assam and published in the Assam Gazette on 11.03.2022.
5. The petitioner has further submitted that during the process of acquisition, the petitioner has been informed that for the purpose of acquiring the plot of land covered by Government Dag no. 166 [Touzi], which is under the occupation of the petitioner since long, an amount of Rs. 4,22,104/- has been assessed towards zirat compensation and an amount of Rs. 3,16,940/- has been assed towards the RCC structure standing on the land, etc. The petitioner has stated that dissatisfied with the quantum of proposed compensation, the petitioner had submitted a representation before the District Commissioner, Sonitpur, who is also the Chairman of the District Level Land Purchase Committee [DLLPC], on 05.09.2024, highlighting his grievance regarding improper assessment and inadequate proposed compensation amount. In the writ petition, the petitioner has inter-alia contended that the valuation in respect of Zirat, structure, etc. have not been properly done and as a result, the proposed amount of compensation is an amount which, according to the petitioner, is inadequate.
6. The petitioner had been served with a notice on 21.12.2024 by the respondent no. 4 asking the petitioner to submit a number of documents mentioned therein in connection with the compensation to be paid against the acquisition of his land, without disclosing the amount assessed towards compensation.
7. Ms. Yanthan, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is agreeable to the process of acquisition of his land by Direct Purchase method provided the procedure laid down in the Notification dated 07.03.2022 for assessment of just compensation are strictly followed and his representation is considered after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
8. By the Notification bearing no. RLA.177/2021/3 dated 07.03.2022 the State Government has framed a scheme, namely, ‘Land acquisition through Direct Purchase by way of negotiated settlement for all Departments in the State of Assam’ [‘the Direct Purchase Scheme’, for short]. As per the Scheme, annexed to the Notification as Annexure-1, the Direct Purchase Scheme has been framed to fast track and simplify the process of land procurement with provision of opportunity to the land-losers to negotiate on the cost of their land they would be paid and the Direct Purchase Scheme has been framed with the expectation that the same would result in lesser litigation from the landowners.
9. The steps and features of the Direct Purchase method have been delineated in Clause 3 of the Notification in the following manner :-
[3] Steps and features of Direct Purchase proce
AI
The court mandated adherence to the Direct Purchase Scheme for fair compensation assessment in land acquisition, ensuring the petitioner has the opportunity for a personal hearing.
The court mandated adherence to the Direct Purchase Scheme for land acquisition, ensuring petitioners receive a fair opportunity to negotiate compensation.
The court mandated adherence to the Direct Purchase Scheme's procedures for land acquisition, emphasizing the need for fair compensation negotiations.
The court emphasized the necessity for fair negotiation in land acquisition processes, mandating that compensation assessments align with prevailing market values and involve personal hearings for la....
The court upheld the necessity of fair compensation assessment in land acquisition proceedings, emphasizing adherence to statutory procedures and personal hearings for affected landowners.
The court held that acquisition authorities must strictly adhere to statutory procedures for fair compensation assessment in land acquisition processes, ensuring landowners' grievances are properly a....
The court established that reassessment of compensation post-award in a negotiated settlement is not legally permissible, ensuring the integrity of the agreed terms.
The court upheld that negotiated agreements for land compensation cannot be unilaterally altered by subsequent administrative actions, emphasizing the doctrine of promissory estoppel.
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.