THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI, J.
Cholingso Kora Son of Late Torelum Kora - Appellant
Vs.
The Union of India and Ors. - Respondent
WP(C) No. 557 Of 2024
Decided On : 20-05-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background regarding land possession and community claims. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments presented by both parties regarding land rights. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. court's observation on compensation and illegal possession. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 4. direction by the court for resolving land possession issues. (Para 27) |
| 5. conclusion and ruling of the court. (Para 28 , 29) |
JUDGMENT & ORDER :
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI, J.
The instant writ petition has been filed with the following prayers.
“I. A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus and/ or Certiorari and/ or any other appropriate order or direction to the official respondents, namely, Union of India through the Department of Defence and Indo Tibetan Border Police (hereinafter referred to as “ITBP through the Commandant 9th Bn ITBP to take appropriate steps and regularize their illegal possession over the petitioner’s land by means of land acquisition under the RFCT Act, 2013 or in the alternative to vacate the land and pay damages/compensation for illegal occupation of petitioner’s land.
2. The petitioner has been presented by one petitioner in a representative capacity on behalf of the villagers of Lohitpur village in the District of Lohit, Arunachal Pradesh. The members belong to Tindya, Kathak, Tamai and Boo clans and the petitioner has also annexed power of Attorneys to represent themselves in the present petition.
3. As per the projected case of the petitioner, from the time of their ancestors, they were in possession of an area of land out of which 96.97 Hectares was taken over possession by the Assam Rifles Battalion during the 1950’s. It is the specific case of the petitioner that such taking over possession was without any authority of law. Subsequently, the land was taken over by the Indo Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) who is under illegal occupation. It has been stated that though the camp of the ITBP stretches to a total area of 145.41 HA, out of the same, 48.44 Hectare is reserved land and the remaining 96.97 HA is Unclassed State Forest Land (USF) which is the community land of the villagers.
4. The villagers have been representing before the authorities on numerous occasions for payment of adequate compensation but no heed has been paid to. In all such representations, it was specifically prayed that either the adequate compensation be paid to the villagers or the land be vacated and peaceful possession of the same be handed over to the villagers.
5. As the representations were not given any heed to, numerous applications under the RTI Act were submitted seeking specific information. For ready reference, the replies given on various dates are extracted hereinbelow:-
“(i) 12.02.2024:-It was replied that the land under occupation ITBP at Lohitpur is not allotted to the user agency as on date;
(ii) 09.09.2024:-
(a) the land occupied by the 9th ITBP at Lohitpur was diverted in favour of 2nd A/R Vide No.FOR.8-56/99-FC dated 05.03.2022 for an area of 14541 Hectare as per below land breakup;
(b) The 9th BN ITBP is situated in RF for 48.433 Hectare in Udiomajam RF and 96.977 Hectare in US area, i.e. outside RF area;
©Yes, the 145.41 Hectare was diverted in favour of 2nd AR & later on transferred in favour of 9th BN ITBP vide No.8-56/1999-FC (Pt) dated 07.07.2015.
(iii)15.10.2024:-
(a)Notification of Denning RF and Udiomajam are enclosed;
(b)This information may be sought from DFO, Lohit. Hence, RTI application is transferred under Section 6 (3) of RTI Act, 2005 to Divisional Forest Officer, Lohit Forest Division, Tezu for providing information to the applicant.
©No, the USF is not notified.
(d)NIL.
(iv)24.10.2024:-
(a)Notification of Udiomajam a Denning RF enclosed;
(b)Maps of Udiomajam a Denning RF enclosed;
©No USF area has been notified in this division;
(d)No de reservation of Udiomajam RF and Denning RF has been done.
(v)14.11.2024:-
(a) DNA in view
Vidya Devi-vs-State of Himachal Pradesh and Others
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs. Darius Shapur Chenai and Others
AI
Possession of land without legal authority by state entities necessitates acquisition or compensation, respecting the customary rights of indigenous communities.
The right to property is constitutional under Article 300-A, mandating government acquisition or compensation for land occupation.
The State cannot dispossess individuals of property without proper legal processes, affirming the entitlement to compensation for land occupied without due course of law.
The obligation of the State to ensure just and reasonable compensation for the deprivation of property, as per the Constitution and relevant statutes.
Petitioners are entitled to rental compensation for unauthorized occupation of land by the Indian Army from 1980 to 2021, to be assessed and disbursed by the Deputy Commissioner.
The court ruled that compensation for land acquisition must be assessed under the RFCTLARR Act, 2013, and not under the State Rehabilitation Policy, as the land was not classified as forest land.
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.
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.