GAHC010261132025

undefined

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WP(C)/7057/2025 SMT HAIMABATI BARUAH

W/O LATE PARESH BARUAH, R/O HOUSE NO. 7, NAAMGHAR, PATH

JANAKPUR, P.O. KAHILIPARA, GUWAHATI 9, DIST. KAMRUP M , ASSAM.

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS

REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIOENR AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF

ASSAM, THE REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT AND DISASTER

MANAGEMENT DEPTT., JANATA BHAWAN, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 6

2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY.

TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM

PUBLIC WORKS AND ROADS DEPTT.

JANATA BHAWAN

DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06

3:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

PWRD NEW GUWAHATI TERRITORIAL DIVISION

BAMUNIMAIDAM

GUWAHATI-21

4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER

KAMRUP (M), HENGRABARI, GUWAHATI-36

ASSAM

5:THE ADDL. DISTRICT COMMISSIONER

IN CHARGE, LAND ACQUISITION BRANCH

KAMRUP (M), ASSAM

6:THE CIRCLE OFFICER

AZARA REVENUE CIRCLE

KAMRUP (M), ASSAM.

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S BORTHAKUR, MR K K GOGOI,MR. U S BORA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE, SC, PWD BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

ORDER

15-12-2025 Heard Shri U. S. Bora, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M.

Barman, learned State Counsel; Ms. G. Hazarika, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department and Ms. S. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Public Works Department.

2. Considering the subject matter involved and as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is taken up for disposal at the motion stage.

3. As per the facts projected, the petitioner is the absolute owner of a plot of land measuring 1 Katha, 6 Lechas covered by Dag No. 680 and Patta No. 458 situated at Revenue village Garal, Mouza Ramcharani, under Azara Revenue Circle. The said land was acquired for which a compensation of Rs.25,67,289/- has also been paid. The petitioner has contended that the amount is inadequate and the relevant factors under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter the Act of 2013) have not been taken into consideration. The specific case of the petitioner is that the fair market price, multiplying factor, solatium and other components have been taken into consideration.

4. Shri Bora, the learned counsel has submitted that in this regard, he has approached the authority for making a reference under Section 64 of the Act of

2013.

5. Ms. Barman, the learned State Counsel has however submitted that the application for reference dated 25.04.2025, apart from being belated, has also not been submitted before the appropriate authority. The learned counsel for the other respondents have also endorsed the aforesaid submission.

6. Upon perusal of the facts and circumstances, it appears that the compensation amount for acquisition of the land has been assessed on

05.02.2025.

7. Section 64 of the Act of 2013 is with regard to reference to authority. As per the same, any person interested can make a written application to the Collector for making a reference for adjudication of his grievance relating to adequacy of the compensation. The said provision, however prescribes a period of limitation for making such an application. For ready reference, Section 64 of the said Act of 2013 is extracted herein below:-

“(1) Any person interested who has not accepted the award may, by written application to the Collector, require that the matter be referred by the Collector for the determination of the Authority, as the case may be, whether his objection be to the measurement of the land, the amount of the compensation, the person to whom it is payable, the rights of Rehabilitation and Resettlement under Chapters V and VI or the apportionment of the compensation among the persons interested:

Provided that the Collector shall, within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of application, make a reference to the appropriate Authority:

Provided further that where the Collector fails to make such reference within the period so specified, the applicant