SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Gau) 1195

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH 
Manish Choudhury, J.
Daniel Topno, Son Of Late Joshep Topno – Petitioner 
Versus
The State Of Assam Represented By Special Commissioner And Special Secretary To The Government Of Assam, Public Works (B And Nh) Public Works Building And National Highway Department – Respondent
Case No. : WP(C)/981 of 2025
Decided On : 21-02-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. S C Biswas, Mr. A K Das,Ms. S. Chanda,Ms. U Nanda
For the Respondent: SC, PWD, GA, ASSAM

The court upheld the necessity of fair compensation assessment in land acquisition proceedings, emphasizing adherence to statutory procedures and personal hearings for affected landowners.

Headnote:(A) Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Notification no. RLA.177/2021/3 dated 07.03.2022 - The petitioner challenged inadequate compensation for land acquisition under Direct Purchase Scheme for road construction. (Paras 2, 4, 7)

(B) Land Acquisition - Necessity for fair assessment of market value of acquired lands is emphasized, with procedures for negotiation outlined. (Paras 6, 8)

(C) The court directed to consider the petitioner's grievances post-hearing and issue a reasoned order, completing the process within six weeks. (Paras 11, 13)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner contended the compensation amount of Rs. 1,80,000/- for 2 Bighas 12 Lessas of land was inadequate, failing to reflect market value.

Findings of Court:
The court ordered that the petitioner’s representation be considered by the District Level Land Purchase Committee after personal hearing and issued a reasoned decision, aiming for expediency in processing.

Issues: The main issue involved the adequacy of compensation determined by the authorities in land acquisition process and the petitioner's right to a fair assessment.

Ratio Decidendi: It was affirmed that all land acquisition procedures must ensure adequate compensation reflective of market value, and the petitioner must be granted a chance to contest the assessment with a reasoned decision issued thereafter.

Result: Writ petition disposed of as directed, with no order as to cost.

Table of Content
1. court's analysis of acquisition process and statutory adherence. (Para 1)
2. land ownership and acquisition process explained. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
3. petitioner's contention regarding compensation procedures. (Para 6 , 11)
4. court direction for negotiation and hearing on compensation. (Para 7 , 10 , 13)
5. amendments to direct purchase scheme and implications. (Para 9 , 12)
6. writ petition disposed without costs. (Para 14)

ORDER :

Manish Choudhury, J.

Heard Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. B. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, Public Works Department for the respondent nos. 1 & 5; and Mr. J. Handique, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4.

2. The petitioner has claimed that he is the owner of a plot of land, covered by Dag no. 25 & Periodic Patta no. 121, situate at Village – Gormora Pathar, 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.

3. It is stated that the respondent authorities have initiated the process of land acquisition under the 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.

4. The petitioner has further submitted that in the process of acquisition, the petitioner has been informed that for the purpose of acquiring 2 Bighas 12 Lessas land out of his plot of land under Dag no. 25 & Periodic Patta no. 121, a total amount of Rs. 1,80,000/- has been assessed. Aggrieved by the quantum of proposed compensation, the petitioner had submitted a representation before the District Commissioner, Sonitpur, on 29.08.2024, who is also the Chairman of the District Level Land Purchase Committee [DLLPC] highlighting his grievance regarding improper assessments and inadequate proposed compensation amounts. In the writ petition, the petitioner has inter-alia contended that the proper and prevailing market value of the lands proposed to be acquired has not been taken and as a result, the proposed amount of compensation is an amount which, according to the petitioner, is inadequate.

5. 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.

6. Mr. Biswas, 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 procedures laid down in the Notification dated 07.03.2022 for assessment of just compensation are strictly followed and his representation is considered after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

7. 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 exception that the same would result in lesser litigation from the landowners.

8. 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

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top