Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 470 (GAU)

Lalramngaihawma v. State of Mizoram

2011-05-31

H.BARUAH

body2011
JUDGMENT H. Baruah, J. 1. Petitioners herein are the owners of the lands under the LSCs as indicated in paragraph-2 of the writ petition, which may be reproduced as under: (a) Sh. Lalramngaihawma - LSC No. AZL. 1759 of 1989 (b) Smt. Rozami - (i) LSC No. AZL. 1760 of 1989 (ii) LSC No. AZL. 1769 of 1989 (c) Smt. Lalthangliani - LSC No. AZL. 1761 of 1989 (d) Smt. Lalrinpuii - LSC No. AZL. 1762 of 1989 (e) Sh. Mangthanfala - (i) LSC No. AZL. 1763 of 1989 (ii) LSC No. AZL. 1766 of 1989 (f) Sh. Malsawmtluanga - LSC No. AZL. 1764 of 1989 (g) Smt. Lalzamliani - LSC No. AZL. 1765 of 1989 (h) Smt. Thangmawii - LSC No. AZL. 1767 of 1989 It would be appropriate to say at this stage that the aforesaid 10 LSCs were initially covered by Misc. Pass No. 122 of 1960 issued by the erstwhile Mizo District Council in favor of Sh. R. L. Mangchhuana, since deceased, which was subsequently converted to Periodic Patta No. 117 of 1977 by the Revenue Authorities and subsequently the lands covered by Periodic Patta No. 117 of 1977 was converted into 10 LSCs as indicated above. It would further be appropriate to say that the petitioners herein are all legal representatives of R.L. Mangchhuana, since deceased. By virtue of the LSCs issued in favor of the Petitioners, the Petitioners acquired the status of settlement holder under Section 7 of the Mizo District (Land & Revenue) Act, 1956. The lands covered under the LSCs which initially covered Periodic Patta No. 117 of 1977 fall within the Brigade area at Bawngkawn and were in occupation of the Army from 1996 till date. Per Mizo accord owners of all private lands and buildings occupied by the Army and Security Forces in Mizoram were to be paid rental compensation by the Government of India and accordingly Rs. 14.9 crores was released for disbursement among the land owners from 1966 to 1986. Petitioners were provided rental compensation for occupation of their lands amounting to Rs. 12,44,514/- for the period as indicated above in the name of the Sh. Mangthanfala, Petitioner No. 5. 2. 14.9 crores was released for disbursement among the land owners from 1966 to 1986. Petitioners were provided rental compensation for occupation of their lands amounting to Rs. 12,44,514/- for the period as indicated above in the name of the Sh. Mangthanfala, Petitioner No. 5. 2. The Respondents thereafter had conducted a joint verification of the areas under the occupation of the Army after which a list of land owners along with the areas occupied and the amount of rental compensation to such land owners for the period from 1-9-1986 to 31-12-1997 was prepared. In the aforesaid list the land of the Petitioners were also included and shown to have been entitled to get the some of Rs. 21,53,507/- payable to Petitioner No. 5 herein. The assessment so made on the basis of the occupation of the lands of the owners by the Joint Verification Team, the Army representatives agreed to take up the matter for immediate sanction of the amount with the Ministry of Defence, Govt. of India pursuant to the meeting held on 29-8-2000. The President of India conveyed ex post facto sanction of the amount of Rs. 5,19,93,771/- in respect of land measuring 183.249 acres for the period from 1-9-1986 to 31-12-1997. But the Petitioners were not given any rental compensation out of the aforesaid amount sanction by the President. Being denied Petitioners submitted representation, but were informed that the name of the Petitioner No. 5 had been dropped since the blue print made in the year 1992-93 did not cover his land. On account of non payment of the compensation for the period from 1-9-1986 to 31-12-1997, the Petitioners filed W.P (C) No. 75 of 2008 and the same was disposed by this Court vide judgment and order dated 17-11-2009, whereby and where under, the High Court was pleased to direct the Respondent Nos. 5 to 7 therein as under: 6. Having regard to all the aspects, the Respondent Nos. 5 to 7 are hereby directed to verify/ascertain as to why the Petitioners' name do not find place in the Blue Print prepared in the year 1992-93 and make a fresh verification, it the Petitioners lands are still in occupation of the Army. This verification shall be done with the assistance of the Task Force constituted by the Govt. of Mizoram vide Notification dated 20-6-2006 with due notice to the Petitioners. This verification shall be done with the assistance of the Task Force constituted by the Govt. of Mizoram vide Notification dated 20-6-2006 with due notice to the Petitioners. The verification shall be done at an early date preferably, within a period of six moths from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 3. Pursuant to the direction the Respondents conducted joint spot verification on 4-6-2010 and 7-6-2010 and submitted report (Annexure-16), wherein it has been indicated as under: REPORT OF JOINT VERIFICATION * * * * * * * * * In view of the above findings it was agreed by all the parties the claim of the Petitioners was genuine and that the lands of the Petitioners in all the 3 above mentioned cases was under the occupation of the Army till it was de-hired in September-2008 when it was handed over to the State Government by the Army authorities. The final assessment of the verification Team giving details of the area occupied by the Army details of Land Settlement Certificate of the Petitioners and the rental compensation payable to them is appended in Annexure-A It would be appropriate to say that the joint verification was conducted by the representatives of the Defence Estate Officer, representatives of the State of Mizoram and representatives of the Petitioners. It would also be appropriate to say that they prepared a list of persons of whose lands are found under the occupation of the Army. 4. During pendency of the W.P (C) No. 75 of 2008, the Petitioners' lands under the occupation of the Army was de-hired and handed over to the Respondent No. 4 on 9-9-2008, even after such de-hiring of the lands of the Petitioners, their lands are still in occupation of the State, for which they are also entitled to compensation. 5. It is contended by the Petitioners under the above facts that they are entitled to rental compensation on and from Sep. 1986 till Sep. 2008 on account of occupation by the Army and from Sep. 2008 till date they are also entitled compensation to be provided by the State Government for occupation of their lands. It is also submitted by them that on account of occupation of their lands by the Army as well as by the State Government from Sep. 1986 till Sep. 2008 on account of occupation by the Army and from Sep. 2008 till date they are also entitled compensation to be provided by the State Government for occupation of their lands. It is also submitted by them that on account of occupation of their lands by the Army as well as by the State Government from Sep. 1986 to till date, they are being deprived of their property for which they are entitled to compensation. It is also contended that they having been deprived of the compensation for such occupation there is violation of provision of Article 300A of the Constitution. No person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law as mandated in Article 300A. Under the circumstances the Petitioners have prayed, to provide them rental compensation for occupation of their lands by the Army as well as by the State Government for the period as indicated therein before and thereafter to release their lands in their favor by the State Government. 6. No affidavit is filed by Respondent Nos. 5,6 and 7 despite grant of time. However, Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 filed a counter affidavit, wherein it is contended that the rental compensation was paid to the land owners whose lands figured in the blue print area and those land owners whose names do not figure in the blue print area they were not provided with rental compensation. The Respondents have admitted conduct of fresh verification of Petitioners' lands and submission of verification report by the team per direction of the High Court vide judgment and order dated 17-11-2009. It is contended that the report was submitted by the Joint Verification Team is under examination of the Government in Revenue Department. Further it is contended that after de-hiring of the lands of the Petitioners, the government is taking every possible steps to hand over the land to the genuine land owners. 7. Mr. A.R. Malhotra, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners strenuously submits that since the lands of the Petitioners were in occupation of the Army from Sep. 1986 till Sep. 2008 and from 9-9-2008 onwards under the occupation of the Government, the Petitioners are entitled to rental compensation for those period from the respective Government, i.e. the Union of India and the State. The occupation of the Petitioners' lands by the Army from Sep. 1986 till Sep. 1986 till Sep. 2008 and from 9-9-2008 onwards under the occupation of the Government, the Petitioners are entitled to rental compensation for those period from the respective Government, i.e. the Union of India and the State. The occupation of the Petitioners' lands by the Army from Sep. 1986 till Sep. 2008 by the Army can be seen from the verification report submitted by the officers of the Union as well as the State and the representatives of the Petitioners. In the report it has been categorically stated in paragraph-3 and 4 that the claim of the Petitioners is genuine and their lands are in occupation of the Army till the date of de-hiring i.e. on 9-9-2008. It is, therefore, submitted by Mr. A.R. Malhotra, that since the lands belonging to the Petitioners were in the occupation of Army from Sep. 1986 to Sep. 2008 they would be entitled to rental compensation. Mr. Malhotra, therefore, urges this Court to issue direction to the Respondents, Respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 in particular to sanction and release compensation for the occupation of the lands of the Petitioners by the Army. It is further argued taking recourse to Annexure-17 that from October-2008 till date, the Petitioners are also entitled to compensation on account of retention of their lands by the State Government after de-hiring of their lands on 9-9-2008. From the Annexure-18 it appears that some lands mentioned under the head "DETAILS OF LAND HANDED OVER" are handed over to the Deputy Commissioner, Aizawl District, Aizawl on 9th of September, 2008, which are reproduced as under: DETAILS OF LAND HANDED OVER (Based on survey Report of 2005): (1) Bawngkawn Brigade area (34.710 Acres or 104.13 Bigha) (2) MES (Military Engineering Service) area Thuampui (1.219 Acres or 3.657 Bigha) (3) MH (Military Hospital) Thuampui (2.836 Acres or 8508 Bigha) (4) EME (Electrical & Mech. Engineers) Zemabawk Falkland Veng (73.725 Acres or 221.175 Bigha) Total: 112.49 Acres or 337.47 Bighas (Sketch of each area are enclosed) In the aforesaid Annexure-18 it is also indicated that rental charge up to the date of de-hiring will have to be paid to the State Government as per existing procedure. This indicates that till the date of de-hiring i.e. on 9-9-2008, the Petitioners' lands though were under occupation of the Army were not provided with rental compensation. Mr. This indicates that till the date of de-hiring i.e. on 9-9-2008, the Petitioners' lands though were under occupation of the Army were not provided with rental compensation. Mr. A. R. Malhotra, submits before this Court that an appropriate direction may be issued to the Respondents to pay rental compensation for occupation of the land by the Army as well as by the State till date and to release their lands thereafter. 8. Mr. B. Pathak, learned CGC, however, tries to impress upon this Court that since the Government is examining the verification report (Annexure-16) prepared by the Joint Verification Team, it would not be appropriate to issue a direction to the Respondents particularly, the Respondent No. 5 to 7 to release the compensation on account of occupation of the Petitioners lands. Since the Joint Verification Team found the claim of the Petitioners genuine on account of occupation of their lands by the Army till 9-9-2008 submissions of Mr. B. Pathak would have no leg to stand. Apart from that the Respondent Nos. 5 to 7 have not challenged the validity of the Verification Report (Annexure-16) by filing counter affidavit. Therefore, this Court does not find any plausible reason not to act on the Joint Verification Report (Annexure-16). 9. From Annexure-17 and Annexure-18 it also appears to us that some lands, details of the same shown in Annexure-18 after the date of de-hiring were handed over the Deputy Commissioner, Aizawl on 9-9-2008, despite handing over the lands as indicated therein, the same are not released on favor of the Petitioners, for which the Petitioners have to submit a representation (Annexure-17) to the Secretary, Land Revenue & Settlement Department, Government of Mizoram, Aizawl for making assessment of the rental compensation for forcible occupation of their lands located at Bawngkawn Brigade area by the Army authority as well as the State. 10. Taking all the facts into consideration, this Court is of considered view that the Petitioners on account of occupation of their lands by the Army as well as the State on and from the date as indicated herein before, are entitled to compensation. 10. Taking all the facts into consideration, this Court is of considered view that the Petitioners on account of occupation of their lands by the Army as well as the State on and from the date as indicated herein before, are entitled to compensation. The Respondent authorities are, therefore, directed to assess compensation on account of occupation of their lands by Army as well as the State from the dates indicated herein before within a period of 3 (three) months from today and payment of compensation so to be assessed within a period of 4 months thereafter. 11. With the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. No cost.