Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
Lama Tenzin, Son of Late Namgey – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Defence – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI, J.
Three nos. of petitioners have joined together in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, with the following prayer:
“I. A Writ of Certiorari shall not be issued quashing and setting aside the impugned revised estimate cost of compensation prepared for Shungatser to Sulula of Tawang District for the area measuring 3,38,400/- (three lakhs thirty-eight thousand four hundred) Square Meters, amounting to Rs.11,11,98,240/- (Rupees eleven crore eleven lacs ninety-eight thousand two hundred forty).
II. A Writ of Certiorari shall not be of issued quashing and setting aside the impugned letter communication dated 21.03.2022, whereby the Deputy Commissioner, Tawang District, upon preparation of impugned revised estimate, had sent the same to the Director, LM, Government of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar, for necessary action.
III. A Writ of Certiorari shall not be issued quashing and setting aside the impugned minute of meeting dated 14.12.2022 drawn by the respondent authority, wherein the respondent authority had conveyed that the villagers have accepted compensation amount of Rs.11,11,98,240/- (Rupees eleven crore eleven lacs ninety-ei
The court ruled that in land acquisition, established multiplication factors must be adhered to, as deviating from them unlawfully denies rightful compensation.
The notification setting a multiplier of 1.00 for compensation calculation was struck down, necessitating a new notification to apply a multiplier of 2.00 for recalculating compensation.
The Court affirmed that compensation in land acquisition cases must reflect true market value independent of the claimant's request, emphasizing the duty to assess fair compensation using proper valu....
The court affirmed that the doctrine of stare decisis applies, and legal principles declared by courts generally have retrospective effect unless explicitly stated otherwise.
Entitlement to additional compensation under Section 30(3) of the Act, 2013 must include multiplication factor in determining market value.
Absence of local sales permits reliance on nearby circle awards for market value, with 10% annual cumulative increase for time gap; uniform rate applies to single-unit public acquisitions irrespectiv....
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
