Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
Bhauram Jodhraj – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, Represented by its Secretary, New Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY, J.
1. Heard Mr. S. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. H. Sharma, learned State counsel for the respondents. Though the Union of India was represented earlier by Mr. S.K. Medhi, CGC, however, he submits that now brief has been taken from the office of CGC by the respondent No. 2.
2. Case of the petitioner:
2.1 The petitioner firm is the owner of a Tea Estate, namely, Amchong Tea Estate, situated at Sonapur, Kamrup (M), Assam. It is the grievance of the petitioner that in the month of February 2020, the respondent No. 2, i.e., the Defence Estate Officer, Guwahati Circle, Narengi Military Station, illegally trespassed into a portion of aforesaid Tea Estate land (hereinafter referred to as subject land), measuring 10 Bighas 12 Lechas covered by Dag Nos. 648/649/650/665 of KP Patta No. 32, situated at Amchong revenue village under Panbari Mouza of Sonapur Revenue Circle in the district of Kamrup (m), without acquiring the same and started construction activities in it.
2.2 It is the further case of the petitioner that after noticing the same, when the employees of the petitioner firm asked the Defence authorities to stop such activities, the Defe
Land held under patta by a private owner cannot be occupied by government authorities without following lawful acquisition procedures, ensuring property rights are protected.
Traditional land ownership rights in Arunachal Pradesh must be acknowledged, and mere possession is insufficient to establish ownership without considering customary practices.
The right to property is constitutional under Article 300-A, mandating government acquisition or compensation for land occupation.
The obligation of the State to ensure just and reasonable compensation for the deprivation of property, as per the Constitution and relevant statutes.
Public authorities must follow statutory procedures for land acquisition; failure to do so violates constitutional rights.
Lack of documented ownership by the petitioners precludes their claim for demarcation against established military land possession.
If right of property is a human right as also a constitutional right, same cannot be taken away except in accordance with law. Article 300-A of Constitution protects such right.
The court affirmed the petitioners' fundamental right to property and directed the expeditious acquisition of land occupied by the Army, ensuring due process and compensation.
Land Acquisition and Requisition – Right of compensation - Where right of compensation of petitioner/appellant is dependent upon proof of his title/ownership as well as on fact that whether land was ....
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
