Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 640 (GAU)

Nuzawni & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

2014-06-18

B.K.SHARMA

body2014
B.K Sharma, J.- Heard Mr. A.R. Malhotra, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. A.H. Barbhuiyan, learned CGC. I have also heard Mr. A. Lallawmzuala, learned Addl. A.G., Mizoram. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a direction to the respondents to pay rental compensation amounting to Rs.10,50, 840 for the period from 27.05.2007 to 30.11.2010 as has been assessed by the profonna respondent No. 5 and conveyed to the Chief Engineer, Project Pushpak vide the Annexure-22 letter dated 20.12.2012, Earlier, the petitioners had approached this Court by filing a writ petition being WP(C) No.75/2009 for payment of rental compensation for the aforesaid and the writ petition was disposed of by order dated 12.02.2010 with the following direction: "Considering the aforesaid circumstances and for the reasons stated above, as agreed to by the learned counsel for both the parties, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage with a simple direction to the respondents-1, 2 and 3 to consider payment of arrear rental dues in respect of the plot of land occupied by the respondents in terms of the Agreement signed between the petitioner and the respondents at the rate approved and accepted by the respondents, at which the last payment was made to the petitioner. The petitioner is also directed to formally write to the respondents claiming the arrear dues of the plot of land occupied by them together with copy of this writ petition. However, the respondent authorities are directed to dispose of any application or representation so submitted by the petitioner within two months from the date of receipt of such application or representation together with a certified copy of this order." 3. The aforesaid direction of this Court was in the backdrop of the decree that was obtained by the petitioners in Civil Suit No.2/1999, disposed of on 10.11.2003 with me following order "Facts and circumstances mentioned above have shown and indicated that the plaintiffs' are entitled to the reliefs from the defendants 1-3 as follows:- (a) Land rent from the year 1992 as assessed by the defendant No.4 till vacation of the suit land or till the land is acquired as pre law, and (b) Compensation against damage of fish pond to be assessed within three months by the defendant No.4. With the above the suit is decreed on contest in favour of the plaintiffs. With the above the suit is decreed on contest in favour of the plaintiffs. Given under my hand and seal of the court this day the 10.11.2003," 4. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the Union of India had preferred RFA No. 19/2004, which was dismissed vide judgment and order dated 28.09.2005 upholding the judgment and decree of the learned Trial Court. Thereafter, they preferred RSA No.01/2006, which was also dismissed vide judgment and order dated 12.012007. 5. Inspite of the aforesaid position, when the rental compensation for the period in question was not paid, the petitioners filed the aforesaid writ petition, which was disposed of by the above quoted direction. Thereafter, the Collector calculated the rental compensation at Rs. 10,50,840/- for the period from 27.05.2007 to 30.11.2010. Be it stated here that the land in question has already been reverted back to the petitioners. Thus, the issue involved in this writ petition is in respect of the rental compensation for the aforesaid period only. 6. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, it has been contended that the assessment made by the Collector is not as per law, as the particular Act under which the assessment has been made is not applicable to the present case. The Act that has been referred to is called Mizoram Urban Areas Rent Control Act, 1974, applicability of which was ruled out by this Court in WP(C) No. 86/2007 vide judgment and order dated 06.12.2007, about which, mention has been made in one of the orders passed in this proceeding i.e. order dated 07.11.2013. By the said order, the collector was directed to file an affidavit to clarify the position. 7. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the Collector has filed an affidavit stating therein that the assessment was made on the basis of the Mizoram Urban Areas Rent Control Act, 1974, in short MUARCA, 1974. 8. While Mr. Malhotra, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in view of the earlier direction of this Court to assess the rental compensation on the basis of the criteria adopted for payment of such rental compensation for the earlier period, there is no escape from the liability of the respondents to pay rental compensation for the remaining period on the basis of the earlier calculation, Mr. A.R. Barbhuiyan, learned CGC referring to the stand of the respondents in the counter affidavit submits that the provision of the aforesaid Act is not applicable and that the petitioners are entitled to rental compensation as per the terms and conditions of the agreement. 9. Although, in the counter affidavit of the respondents, the plea taken is that the provisions of MUARCA is not applicable, but they have not specified as to what provision will be applicable towards assessing the rental compensation for the period in question. The fact of the matter is that as per the direction of this Court in WP(C) No. 75/2009 referred to above, the respondents are obliged to assess the rental compensation on the basis of which the last payment was made to the petitioners. The said order has attained finality. On the other hand, as noted above, the respondents have also not specified anything in the counter affidavit as to under what formula the rental compensation will be calculated. 10. The petitioners are entitled to get rental compensation in terms of the above quoted judgment and decree affirmed in the second appeal. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to pay the rental compensation for the period in question following the said judgment and decree and also the aforementioned judgment of this Court taking into account the calculation that was made towards payment of the rental compensation for the earlier period. Let the required exercise in terms of this order be carried out and completed with the payment of rental compensation to the petitioners as expeditiously as possible, but at any rate, not later than 31.08.2014. 11. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _