GAUHATI HIGH COURT ISSUES ORDER ON SMTI. ARATI BHAR AND 5 ORS V/S THE UNION OF INDIA AND 7 ORS

GUWAHATI, India, April 19 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on March 19:

1. Heard Mr. P.K. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. A. Gayan, learned CGC, for the respondents No. 1, 7 and 8; Ms. N. Bordoloi, learned Standing counsel, for the respondent No.2; Ms. D.D. Barman, learned State counsel, for the respondent No.3 and Ms. M. Das, learned Standing Counsel, PWD, for the respondents No. 5 and 6.

2. By filing this petition, the petitioners have prayed for a direction to the respondent authorities to return their parcels of land measuring 2 bighas 14 kathas and 12 lechas covered by Dag No. 288/293 and Patta No. 115/117 located at village Siddeswar Part-II, in the District Cachar, Assam. The petitioners have also prayed for payment of outstanding rent, which is alleged to have been accrued over the years in respect of the said land.

3. The case of the petitioners, in a nutshell, is that the petitioners, six in numbers, who are the descendants of late Matilal Bhar, claim to have inherited the right over the land measuring 2 bighas 14 kathas 12 lechas covered by Dag No. 288/293 under Patta No. 115/117 of Village Siddeswar Part-II in the district of Cachar. The said land was requisitioned by the Deputy Commissioner, Cachar on 26.11.1964 vide R.C. No. 8/L/1964-65, under Section 3(I) of Assam Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1964 as the land was required for maintaining supply and service of essentials to the life of the community and for establishment of 'A' company Headquarter of BRO. After taking possession of the said land, the same was handed over to the respondent BRTF (GREF).

4. Thereafter, the land acquisition proceedings was initiated by the Deputy Commissioner, Cachar vide LA 6/2002-2003 for acquisition of the said land by issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (since repealed). However, the declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (since repealed) was issued on 21.06.2013.

5. It is the contention of the petitioners that the land was under requisition from 26.11.1964 and was paid requisition initially for certain period and the father of the petitioners received the last requisition rent only on 05.08.2005 which is supported by the Memo indicating disbursement of requisition rent for a particular period. After 05.08.2005, the petitioners were not paid any requisition rent. It is contended that the land of the petitioners was not acquired by following any valid process of acquisition as the respondents have not brought anything on record as regards their claim of acquisition by following due acquisition process under the relevant provision of law, except some process indicating initiation for acquisition.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=zDLovBVSUw02H8XukOjXfM7JpUxYJqbgJOzCFnEo7cZzrr0qG0Y%2BaXXNVeiRuKFB&caseno=WP(C)/1055/2022&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010023322022&state_code=6&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.