Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 688 (JHR)

Deepak v. State of Jharkhand

2014-07-03

P.P.BHATT, R.BANUMATHI

body2014
Order 1. The petitioner is represented by Mr. Vijay Kant Dubey, Advocate and the State is represented by JC to G.A. 2. This Public Interest Litigation is filed seeking direction upon the respondents, particularly the first respondent to forthwith disburse the compensation amount to the land owners whose lands were acquired for the purpose of new terminal of Birsa Munda Airport Extension, Ranchi. 3. The petitioner, who claims to be a journalist, has filed this public interest litigation alleging that even though 350 acres of lands were acquired in the year 2009 for the purpose of new terminal of Birsa Munda Airport Extension, Ranchi, and the Government of Jharkhand has alloted merely Rs.100 crores being paid for the compensation to the land owners. It is further alleged that out of the compensation amount, only about Rs.20.50 crores have been paid so far and the remaining amount has not been disbursed, and therefore, the petitioner has filed this PIL seeking for a direction upon the respondents to disburse the compensation amount to the land owners. The petitioner has also alleged that one Government official namely Sri Shailendra Bhushan has purchased about 70 decimals of land in the disputed village at Hetu in the name of his two sons and also mutated the land in their names. The said Sri Shailendra Bhushan is alleged to have obtained compensation of Rs.59.44 lakhs in the name of his sons. According to the petitioner, the said officer has deliberately purchased the disputed land so as to get the compensation from the Government. 4. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned junior counsel to Government Advocate appearing for the State of Jharkhand. 5. The State has filed a detailed counter affidavit stating that totaling to 301.12 acres of land was acquired for new Terminal of Birsa Munda Airport Extension at Ranchi. It is further stated that for the acquired land, about Rs.100 Crores was alloted for payment of compensation to the land owners/jamabandi raiyats and the said land owners/jamabandi raiyats have been paid compensation to the tune of Rs.98,94,43,829/-. The details of payment of the compensation to the land owners/jamabandi raiyats is indicated in paragraph-8 of the counter affidavit filed by the respondents. 6. The details of payment of the compensation to the land owners/jamabandi raiyats is indicated in paragraph-8 of the counter affidavit filed by the respondents. 6. In so far as the grievance of the petitioner regarding the land (Khata No.30, Plot No.1299, 70 decimals) purchased by Sri Shailendra Bhushan in the name of his sons is concerned, it is stated that an amount of Rs.29,72,693/-was paid to Sri Abhay Kumar, son of Sri Shailendra Bhushan, in L.A. Case No.09/ 08-09, and an equal amount of Rs.29,72,693/-is said to have been paid to Sri Ajay Kumar another son of Sri Shailendra Bhushan, in Land Acquisition Case No.09/08-09 and both the said amount is said to have been paid to them by cheque. It is further stated that one Rukmani Devi and another Urmila Devi, both daughters of Late Bandhu Singh, resident of Hethu, made objection before the Land Acquisition Officer, Ranchi, against the payment of compensation to the said Abhay Kumar and Ajay Kumar both sons of Sri Shailendra Bhushan. It is further stated that the District Land Acquisition Officer, Ranchi had heard both the parties on 27.06.2012 and he had taken the decision. Against the jamabandi created in favour of the sons of Shri Shailendra Bhushan an appeal has been preferred in the Court of Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Ranchi, which is subjudice and further restrained the payment of compensation to them. Since, the jamabandi of the said land is subjudice before the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Ranchi, no further direction need to be issued in respect of the grievance of the petitioner regarding the alleged payment of compensation amount to the sons of Sri Shailendra Bhushan. 7. In so far as the allegation regarding the disputed land alleged to have been purchased by the officer Sri Shailendra Bhushan in the name of his sons, to which the mutation appeals are pending in the court of Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Ranchi, it is for the parties to work out the remedy in accordance with law. 8. Since, most part of the compensation amount has been paid to the land owners/jamabandi raiyats, this Public Interest Litigation is disposed of with the aforesaid direction and observations. PIL disposed of.