Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1136 (JHR)

Arun Chandra Mahato v. State of Jharkhand

2017-07-17

RAJESH SHANKAR

body2017
JUDGMENT : 1. Heard learned counsels for the parties. 2. The present writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners for issuance of direction upon the respondents to make payment of compensation for the residential houses as well as the wells situated over Plot Nos. 581 [W.P. (C) No. 7107/2006] and 596 [W.P. (C) No. 6658/2006] respectively, Village-Murugdih, Thana-Chandil (Nimdih), Thana No. 96, District-Saraikella-Kharswan, which were also acquired in addition to their agricultural land with suitable interest over the same. The petitioners have also prayed for quashing the orders contained in Memo No. 1248 dated 12.09.2006 and Memo No. 1247 dated 12.09.2006 respectively, issued by the respondent No. 4 whereby the claim of the petitioners was rejected on the ground that since the lands in question have not been acquired, hence the question of payment of compensation does not arise. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the displaced persons of Swarnrekha Multipurpose Project, Chandil. Besides the agricultural lands of the petitioners, their residential houses as well as wells were also acquired by the respondents, but no compensation has been paid to them for acquisition of their residential houses and wells due to the lapses on the part of the respondents. Learned counsel invites attention of the Court towards various communications made by the authorities under the Swarnrekha Multipurpose Project, Chandil and submits that the petitioners should also be awarded compensation for their residential houses and wells. Accordingly, the impugned orders passed by the respondent No. 4 may be set aside. 4. Learned J.C. to S.C. (L&C) submits that the aforesaid writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners on the ground that pursuant to land acquisition proceedings, the petitioners have been paid compensation for the lands acquired, however, no compensation has been paid for the houses and wells belonging to them, which were acquired by the respondents. In course of hearing of both the writ petitions, it transpired that there were contradictory reports, one report is Annexure-2 to W.P. (C) No. 7107/2006 dated 15.12.2005, which has been issued under the signature of the Chief Engineer, Swarnrekha Multipurpose Project, Chandil Complex, Jamshedpur and another report is Annexure-C dated 21.08.2006, annexed with the supplementary counter affidavit dated 12.10.2012 in W.P. (C) No. 6658/2006, issued under the signature of the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Swarnrekha Multipurpose Project, Chandil enclosing a list. Therefore, in terms of order dated 31.01.2013, this Court directed the respondents’ counsel to produce the original records pertaining to acquisition of the petitioners’ land [Plot No. 596 in W.P. (C) No. 6658/2006 and Plot No. 581 in W.P. (C) No. 7107/2006] on the basis of declaration contained in Annexure-5 to W.P. (C) No. 7107/2006 dated 06.07.2002. The case was ordered to be listed after three weeks to enable the counsel for the respondents to produce the original documents and to state the reasons as to why there is contradiction in Annexure-2 and Annexure-C filed by way of supplementary counter affidavit. In pursuance of the order dated 31.01.2013 passed by this Court, a supplementary affidavit dated 14.03.2013 has been filed by the respondent No. 7. 5. The learned counsel for the respondents while referring to the supplementary affidavit dated 14.03.2013, further submits that the L.A. Case No. 2/2001-02 was initiated under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act for acquisition of land for construction of Swarnrekha Multipurpose Project, Chandil in which the lands of Plot Nos. 581 and 596 belonging to the petitioners respectively were acquired. During the proceedings of the land acquisition case, a declaration dated 06.07.2002 was published in Zila Gazette with respect to the lands, which included the lands of the petitioners being Plot Nos. 581 and 596 respectively. Ultimately the award was prepared and published on 18.02.2005 and in lieu of acquisition of the lands belonging to the petitioners being Plot Nos. 581 and 596 respectively, they were granted due compensation, which was accepted by them without any protest. So far as payment of compensation of the houses and wells in question is concerned, a list was prepared with respect to the land owners regarding acquisition of their houses and wells in the aforesaid land acquisition proceedings dated 29.08.2005. During correspondence, it transpired that the petitioners had no house or well on Plot Nos. 581 and 596. However, in connivance with the lower revenue staff, they managed to enter their names in the aforesaid list. In view of incorrect and false entry in the list of land owners, the letter dated 28.07.2006 was issued under the signature of the Administrator, Swarnrekha Multipurpose Project, Chandil, which was addressed to the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Swarnrekha Multipurpose Project, Chandil to make a fresh enquiry. In view of incorrect and false entry in the list of land owners, the letter dated 28.07.2006 was issued under the signature of the Administrator, Swarnrekha Multipurpose Project, Chandil, which was addressed to the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Swarnrekha Multipurpose Project, Chandil to make a fresh enquiry. In this regard, a letter bearing No. 163 dated 05.08.2006 was also issued under the signature of the Additional Collector, Seraikella, addressing to the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Swarnrekha Multipurpose Project, Chandil to make a fresh enquiry in view of the fact that an incorrect and false list of the land owners was prepared in connivance with the lower staff of the department. Pursuant to the aforesaid letters, a fresh spot verification was made in which a spot report was prepared on 18.08.2006 and after necessary verification, a fresh list of actual land owners was prepared, who had their dwelling houses and wells over the lands acquired. Annexure-2 to W.P. (C) No. 7107/2006 is a report dated 15.12.2005 issued under the signature of the Chief Engineer, Swarnrekha Multipurpose Project, Chandil, which was prepared much before the fresh enquiry dated 21.08.2006. Annexure-C to W.P. (C) No. 6658/2006 is a list dated 21.08.2006, which was prepared after the fresh enquiry, which contains the names of the actual land owners, who had their dwelling houses and wells over the lands acquired in which the names of Arun Chand Mahato with respect to Plot No. 596 and Rajendra Nath Mahato with respect to Plot No. 581 are not mentioned. The erring clerk who was instrumental in preparing the incorrect and false list, namely, Baleshwar Yadav was terminated from service pursuant to the departmental proceeding. Therefore, it is apparent that the petitioners are misrepresenting before this Court by taking advantage of Annexure-2 to W.P. (C) No. 7107/2006 and Annexure-C annexed with the supplementary affidavit filed in W.P. (C) No. 6658 of 2006. 6. Therefore, it is apparent that the petitioners are misrepresenting before this Court by taking advantage of Annexure-2 to W.P. (C) No. 7107/2006 and Annexure-C annexed with the supplementary affidavit filed in W.P. (C) No. 6658 of 2006. 6. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and considering the specific factual stand taken by the respondents in the supplementary counter affidavit dated 14.03.2013 filed in W.P. (C) No. 7107/2006, it appears that pursuant to the fresh enquiry, a fresh list dated 21.08.2006 was prepared which contains the names of the actual land owners, who had their own dwelling houses and wells over the lands acquired, but the names of the petitioners with respect to Plot No. 596 and Plot No. 581 have not been mentioned in the said list. Moreover, the erring clerk who was instrumental in preparing an erroneous and false list, has already been terminated from service pursuant to a departmental proceeding. 7. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the writ petitions, being devoid of merit are, accordingly, dismissed.