Landowners whose property is occupied by the state without formal acquisition are entitled to compensation under Article 300A, and any ongoing occupation or subsequent formal acquisition must be governed by the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

Whether the pronouncement is of the : Yes.

operative part of the judgment ?

Whether the full judgment has been : No.

pronounced?

JUDGMENT & ORDER (CAV)

1. Heard Mr. Lalchhanliana Khiangte, the learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. Zairemsangpuii, the learned Central Government Counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Ms. Caroline K. Lungawipuii, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent No. 4.

2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners, namely, 1. Bawihzika, 2. Ngurchungnunga, 3. Lalhruaizuala and 4. Lalzuithanga seeking expeditious payment of compensation assessed by the District Collector, Kolasib in compliance to the judgment and order dated 23.02.2017, passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C) No. 48/2019 and WP(C) No. 19 of 2011.

3. Prior to filing of the instant Writ Petition, the present petitioners had approached this Court on an earlier occasion by filing Writ Petition, i.e., W.P.(C) No. 48/2010, wherein they had prayed for payment of compensation as per Award No. 1 of 2007, which was made by the District Collector, Kolasib, in connection with acquisition of lands located within Vairengte, VC-II area under Vairengte Sub-Division for establishment of Counter Insurgency Jungle Warfare School (CIJWS), a key location post at Vairengte for which notifications under Section 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, were issued by the State Government.

4. The Union of India also filed a Writ Petition bearing WP(C) No. 19 of 2011, wherein it contended that the State Government, on its own initiative, issued the two notifications for acquisition of land without consulting the Ministry of Defense and without there being any formal requisition, although there was a discussion regarding increasing the area of CIJW School.

5. It is contended in the present Writ Petition that during the pendency of the earlier Writ Petitions, the Central Government had given approval for acquisition of land occupied by the CIJW School and also for the extension of the same. However, as many fake claims were made by fake land owners and an investigation was initiated by the Anti-Corruption Branch of the CID. After completion of the investigation, it was found that only 21 land passes (including that of the present petitioners) were genuine.

6. The Writ Petition No. 48 of 2010 and Writ Petition No. 19 of 2011 were disposed of by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court by a common judgment dated 23.07.2017. In the aforesaid judgment, it was held that the genuine land owners should be adequately compensated in terms of the provisions of Article 300A of the Constitution of India, as well as Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for the loss of their land. In the said judgment, the District Collector, Kolasib was directed to make a verification as to the placement of genuine land passes and land owners, viz-a-viz, the Award No. 1 of 2007.

7. It was also directed that the District Collector, Kolasib, shall constitute a verification team consisting of Revenue Department and representative of respondents Nos. 1 to 4, who shall verify whether the land covered by 21 (twenty one) genuine passes are already occupied areas by the CIJW School or not. It was directed if the verification team finds that the lands of the petitioners were within the lands that are to be in the area of extension of CIJW School, there is no question of pa