Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 685 (GAU)

N. Lungmuana v. Union of India

2019-05-31

NELSON SAILO

body2019
JUDGMENT : Nelson Sailo, J. 1. Heard Mr. K.P. Pathak, the learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. Zairemsangpuii, the learned CGC for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and Mrs. H. Lalmalsawmi, the learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent Nos. 3 & 4. 2. Claiming to have a common cause of action, 49 writ petitioners have joined hands in filing the present writ petition. The petitioner Nos. 39 & 40 are reported to have already expired. 3. The claim of the petitioners is that they are in possession of land, which was duly allotted to them by the Revenue Department of the State, under the provisions of the Mizo District (Land and Revenue) Act, 1956 and also under the Mizoram (Agricultural Land) Act, 1963 (Act of 1956 and Act of 1963 respectively) by granting them Land Settlement Certificates/ Agricultural Land Settlement Certificates/Periodic Pattaa (LSCs/Agri LSCs/P. Pattas) to each of the petitioners. Be it stated herein that till 1972, Mizoram was a part of the State of Assam and was known as Lushai Hills District. An Autonomous District Council was created in the year 1952 under the provisions of the 6th Schedule of the Constitution of India for the administration of the region. In 1972, the region separated from the State of Assam and was constituted into a Union Territory. In 1986, Mizoram was accorded full Statehood and became the 23rd State of India. 4. Facts projected by the petitioners is that for establishing a firing range, the Assam Rifles were allotted a plot of land in Chanmari, Aizawl. In 1959, the erstwhile Mizo District Council vide Misc. Pass No. 8/1959 (Annexure-B) ordered the shifting of the firing range to Chite River due to the increase in population in the earlier location. This pass was subsequently superseded by Misc. Pass No. 6/1960 (Annexure-C). 5. The erstwhile District Council vide Memo No. REV1/70/141 dated 08.08.1970 (Annexure-D), issued Notification stating that all temporary passes, such as the one awarded to the Assam Rifles for the establishment of firing range would be valid for only 10 years and unless the pass was converted into LSC, the pass holder would not have any legal right over the land. The Assam Rifles never converted their temporary pass into LSC but they are in occupation of the said land till date. 6. The Assam Rifles never converted their temporary pass into LSC but they are in occupation of the said land till date. 6. After the reconstitution of Mizoram into Union Territory in 1972, the petitioners were awarded LSCs/Agri LSCs/P. Pattas in respect of the same land, which was previously in occupation temporarily by the Assam Rifles for establishment of firing range. However, on 15.11.1986, the Assam Rifles forcibly entered the area and destroyed the crops, fish ponds and buildings of the petitioners and demanded that they vacate the land. Against the action of the Assam Rifles, the petitioners could only submit representations before the Government. After Mizoram was accorded full Statehood, the Revenue Department carefully examined all the land passes and vide Communication dated 24.05.1990 (Annexure-E), issued by the Under Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram, Revenue Department to the Director of Land Revenue & Settlement Department conveyed the decisions of the Government that all DPL passes and Misc. Passes so far issued before the introduction of Land Lease be converted into Land Lease Certificates and that a notice to this effect may be issued. Accordingly, the Director of Land Revenue & Settlement Department vide Notification dated 03.09.1992 (Annexure-E1) notified all the Heads of Department/Semi Department/Corporation/Society etc., to convert their pass into Land Lease and failure to submit and convert their passes may result in cancellation of the pass or permit. Despite this, the petitioners contend that the Assam Rifles failed to convert their pass into a Land Lease. 7. On 06.03.1997 (Annexure-F), the Assam Rifles issued eviction notice to the petitioners asking them to vacate the land, claiming that the land belonged to them by virtue of Misc. Pass No. 6/1960. The petitioners preferred Title Suit against the eviction notice, but the same was withdrawn subsequently. The petitioners contended that in terms of paragraph No. 13 of the Peace Accord dated 30.06.1986, signed between the Mizo National Front and the Govt. of India, compensation on rental and damages to properties was to be paid to individuals whose land or property was under occupation or damaged by the Security Forces. Accordingly, a Communication dated 03.10.2007 (Annexure-I) was sent to the Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India by the State Government for disbursement of rental compensation. of India, compensation on rental and damages to properties was to be paid to individuals whose land or property was under occupation or damaged by the Security Forces. Accordingly, a Communication dated 03.10.2007 (Annexure-I) was sent to the Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India by the State Government for disbursement of rental compensation. A reminder was thereafter sent on 29.09.2009 (Annexure-J) by the State Government, but however no response has been received from the Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India. 8. On 10.03.2010, a joint verification exercise was carried out by the Govt. of Mizoram along with the representations of the Assam Rifles and the petitioners wherein, it was found that the Passes issued to the petitioners were genuine and they were eligible to get rental compensation. Thereafter, several Notifications were sent to the Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India by the State Government for payment of rental compensation that was due to the petitioners but no response has been received from the Ministry. 9. Based on the Mizoram Urban Rent Control Act, 1974, the total rental compensation due from the Assam Rifles for forcible occupation of the land belonging to the petitioners, including the compensation for damages against the properties up to 31.12.2016 is Rs. 51,40,49,054/-. Accordingly, with the inaction of the respondent Assam Rifles as well as the Ministry of Home Affairs, the petitioners are before this Court. 10. Against the writ petition, the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 have filed their affidavit-in- opposition on 05.03.2018, contending inter alia that as the respondent authorities were in peaceful possession of the land, the petitioners could not have obtained their Passes. Therefore, they have obtained their respective Passes either by fraud or by misrepresentation and therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. It is further contended that by the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 in the affidavit that due to the increase in population in the previous area at Chanmari, the firing range had to be shifted to a location near Chite River and for which, Misc. Pass No. 6/1960 was issued by the erstwhile District Council. As per the condition of the Pass, the land was jointly demarcated by 4 pillars and they exist on the ground as on date. The land is also utilized as firing range by the Assam Rifles. Pass No. 6/1960 was issued by the erstwhile District Council. As per the condition of the Pass, the land was jointly demarcated by 4 pillars and they exist on the ground as on date. The land is also utilized as firing range by the Assam Rifles. It was further contended in the affidavit that although reliance has been placed by the petitioners on the Communication dated 24.05.1990 and Notification dated 03.09.1992, the fact remains that even prior to issuance of the two Communications, the petitioners had already obtained their LSCs fraudulently from the Revenue Department. The fact remains that the land given to the Assam Rifles was never withdrawn by the competent authority and therefore, they have every right to occupy the land. 11. A specific statement has been made that the petitioner Nos. 39 & 40 have already expired and the petitioners have failed to make any substitution by their legal representatives. 12. Further, by referring to the Title Suit filed by the petitioners, the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 in their affidavit have stated that the Suit, which was registered as Title Suit No. 5/1998 was withdrawn by the petitioners themselves vide order dated 26.03.2009. 13. In respect to the affidavit-in-opposition of the respondent Nos. 1 & 2, the petitioners filed a rejoinder affidavit on 05.12.2017, wherein the stand taken in the writ petition was reiterated. 14. The Revenue Department (respondent nos. 3 & 4) also filed their affidavit-in- opposition on 05.12.2017 contending inter alia that there are no documents to show that the land Passes were issued to the petitioners as per the Government approval. Hence, the ownership of the land of the petitioners is doubtful. The respondent Nos. 3 & 4 have also denied that a joint verification exercise was carried out on 10.03.2010 inasmuch as, the verification report prepared by the Deputy Director (Survey) Mr. Dawngkima dated 23.03.2010 does not bear the signature of the Assam Rifles. Therefore, this cannot be accepted as joint verification report. The genuineness of the original Pass allotted to the respective individuals has also not been clarified. Therefore, it was only doubtful as no approval of the Government has been mentioned in the Pass. 15. The petitioners in response to the affidavit-in-opposition of the respondent Nos. Therefore, this cannot be accepted as joint verification report. The genuineness of the original Pass allotted to the respective individuals has also not been clarified. Therefore, it was only doubtful as no approval of the Government has been mentioned in the Pass. 15. The petitioners in response to the affidavit-in-opposition of the respondent Nos. 3 & 4 filed their rejoinder affidavit on 17.01.2018 contending inter alia that since the Revenue authorities themselves have issued Passes to the petitioners, they are esstopped from questioning the same at this stage. The petitioners also reiterated the fact that a joint verification was indeed conducted and thereafter, a verification report was prepared on 24.02.2010 and the same only is a clear testimony to the genuineness of the claim of the petitioners. 16. Again on 07.03.2018, the respondent Nos. 3 & 4 filed an additional affidavit, stating that the relevant records pertaining to the land of the petitioners was sought from the Directorate of Revenue Department. Upon examining the same, some of the Passes in the official records were found to be different from the Pass annexed by the petitioners in the writ petition, more particularly, in terms of the area of the land. The area of land as per the Pass of the petitioner No. 5 was seen as 4.52 bighas in the official record but whereas in the Pass annexed in the writ petition, the area is 12.80 bighas. However, the respondents did not deny the Communications dated 15.11.2010, 20.12.2011, 27.09.2012 and 22.02.2013. It was also reiterated that the Director of Land Revenue & Settlement Department should be made a party to the writ petition since it is the Directorate which deals with land Passes and its issuance. 17. In response to the additional affidavit dated 07.03.2018, the petitioners filed a rejoinder affidavit on 29.03.2018 contending inter alia that the doubts raised by the respondent Nos. 3 & 4 on the veracity of the land Pass of the petitioners, more particularly the petitioner No. 5 is only an attempt on their part to mislead the Court by placing incomplete facts. It is contended that the land belonging to the petitioner No. 5 is bisected by the road, which divides the land into 2 parts. One part measuring 4.5 bighas and the other part measuring 8.28 bighas. The same was already verified and authenticated by the respondent Nos. It is contended that the land belonging to the petitioner No. 5 is bisected by the road, which divides the land into 2 parts. One part measuring 4.5 bighas and the other part measuring 8.28 bighas. The same was already verified and authenticated by the respondent Nos. 3 & 4 vide joint verification report dated 24.02.2010. 18. This Court while hearing the matter on 07.03.2019 and upon perusing the verification report dated 23.03.2010 passed the following orders:- "A perusal of the verification report dated 23.03.2010 (Annexure-K to the writ petition) reveals that the verification was done with reference to a communication i.e. J.12012/5/02- REV/Vol-I dated 24.02.2010. It appears that the said communication has been made from Revenue Secretariat. The learned Govt. Advocate, H. Lalmalsawmi is therefore directed to produce the relevant record in original by the next date. Further, on perusal of the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 on 05.03.2018, it is seen that a Meeting was held on 09.11.2009, under the Chairmanship of Joint Secretary (Police-II) regarding the land occupied by the Assam Rifles for Firing Range at Chite river. The Meeting ended with a three point decision and for which, the State Government was required to take a follow up action. However, despite the presence of one Sh. Nikhil Kumar, Joint Secretary of the Govt. of Mizoram, the Meeting Minutes was not marked to the State Government except the Ministry of Home Affairs. The learned CGC shall therefore obtain instructions as to what follow up action was taken pursuant to the Meeting held on 09.11.2009 by the Ministry of Home Affairs with the State Government. To enable Ms. H. Lalmalsawmi, learned Govt. Advocate and Ms. Zairemsangpuii, learned CGC to obtain instructions and produce the relevant records, the case shall now be listed again on 26.03.2019 as part heard." 19. Pursuant to the said order, the matter was listed again on 26.03.2019 on which date, the learned CGC sought for further time to receive instructions. Mr. Joseph L. Renthlei, the learned counsel on behalf of the petitioners produced a Communication dated 24.02.2010, which was sought for by this Court. Pursuant to the said order, the matter was listed again on 26.03.2019 on which date, the learned CGC sought for further time to receive instructions. Mr. Joseph L. Renthlei, the learned counsel on behalf of the petitioners produced a Communication dated 24.02.2010, which was sought for by this Court. The order dated reproduced below for ready perusal:- "GOVERNMENT OF MIZORAM REVENUE DEPARTMENT 24.04.2010 may be ORDER Dated Aizawl, the 24th Feb, 2010 No. J. 12012/5/02-REV/Vol-I - Due to arising of claims of Rental Charges from individuals lands owners at Assam Rifles Firing Range at Chite River and whereas the actual spot verification and site inspection is not yet done by any authorised Government Official for the said claim for payment of those rental charges at Assam Rifles Firing Range at Chite. Pu Dawngkima, Deputy Director (T), DLR&S is appointed to verify the ground realities and scrutinise all the LSCs from the records to ascertain the factual position so as to sub-serve larger public interest and secure the genuine rights of the parties involves at Assam Rifles Firing Range at Chite. Further, Pu. C. Lalringliana, Assistant Director (T), DLR&S is appointed to assist all the works to be done by Pu. Dawngkima, Deputy Director (T), DLR&S and they are instructed to submit details of finding within 30 (thirty) days from the date of issue of this order. This order superseded this Departments order of even no. dated 9.2.2010 Sd/- R.S. LALZAMLIANA Deputy Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram Revenue Department. Memo No. J.12012/5/02-REV/Vol-I Dated Aizawl, the 24th Feb, 2010." 20. From what is abstracted above, it may be seen that verification of the firing range at Chite River was done pursuant to the order dated 24.02.2010 and accordingly, a report was prepared by the Deputy Director of Survey of the Revenue Directorate on 23.03.2010. As per the verification report, the revenue passes of the private land holders were found to be genuine, including the claim for rental compensation. The entire contents of the verification report may also be reproduced for ready perusal as the same has relevance:- "To, The Deputy Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram Revenue Department, Aizawl, Mizoram Subject: Verification Report on Firing Range of Assam Rifles at Chite, Aizawl. Ref. J.12012/5/02-REV/Vol-I Dt. 24th Feb. 2010. The entire contents of the verification report may also be reproduced for ready perusal as the same has relevance:- "To, The Deputy Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram Revenue Department, Aizawl, Mizoram Subject: Verification Report on Firing Range of Assam Rifles at Chite, Aizawl. Ref. J.12012/5/02-REV/Vol-I Dt. 24th Feb. 2010. Sir, With reference to your number on the subject cited above, I have the honour to state that the required spot-verification was done on 10.03.2010 in the presence of the following representatives: 10th Assam Rifles Representatives: 1. Maj. Lalit Kashyap 2. Maj. Yogendra. Land - Owners Representatives: 1. N. Lungmuana and other 48 persons. On the spot-verification. It is found that the Assam Rifles have been occupying a certain plot of land on both sides of Chite river for Firing Range since long back till today, whereas the same plot of land is covered by the private land holdings. On the scrutiny, it is learnt that the Assam Rifles were once allowed to do Firing practices in this area vide Misc. Pass No. 6 of 1960 conditionally without vesting with ownership title over the land. According to the Rules and Regulations in the Revenue Manual there is no relevant provisions to base upon for issuing such kind of Misc./DPL passes. Therefore, Govt. of Mizoram, Revenue Department had eventually issued Notification Memo No. T.22011/ 1/91-DTE(REV)/73 Dated Aizawl the 3rd Sept. 1992 in which all the Misc./DPL passes issued before 24.5.1990 are required to be converted into Land Lease under Section 11 of the Mizo District (Land & Revenue) Act. 1956 and Rule 14 of the Mizo District (Land & Revenue) Rules, 1967. Failure to submit the return reports of such passes or permits for conversion into Land-Lease during September, 1992 may entail cancellation of the passes or permits. The Assam Rifles failed to submit the required return/report within the stipulated time for conversion into Land Lease. In this connection the Representatives of the Assam Rifles had stated that they are occupying the land only on the ground that they have not received cancellation order of Misc. Pass No. 6 of 1960 from the Revenue Department and further stated that the site will be utilized until and unless the Headquarters is shifted to Zokhawsang. It is learnt from the claimants that in the year 1972, just after the inception of Union Territory in Mizoram the Govt. Pass No. 6 of 1960 from the Revenue Department and further stated that the site will be utilized until and unless the Headquarters is shifted to Zokhawsang. It is learnt from the claimants that in the year 1972, just after the inception of Union Territory in Mizoram the Govt. of Mizoram, Ministry of Revenue headed by the Hon'ble Minister. Shri Khawtinkhuma had a decision to allow the whole area on both sides of Chite River between Aizawl and Zemabawk for private farmers. Consequently, several passes P. Pattas etc were issued to the local farmers in that area. On scrutiny of all connected papers and after checking the land records/General register and guard file of the Revenue Department as seen in the checking proforma enclosed it is found that all the Revenue Passes in respect of the private land holders are found genuine and they have been paying the mandatory Revenue taxes as per the existing State land laws till date. However, the private land holders are not able to develop and look after their lands due to continuous forcible occupation of their lands by the Assam Rifles. It is also ascertained that some P. Pattas had been converted into a number of House Site LSCs, but to avoid compensations and to reduce the list of claimants, they are claiming rental charges as per their superseded/previous P. Pattas as per lists enclosed. Further some LSCs have also been recently bought and sold to other persons. However, as transfer of ownership (mutation) has not been effected in the Revenue Department Register. No Objection Certificates (NOC) for claiming rental charge have also been obtained from the previous Pass Holders. However, in some cases of such transfer of ownership, rental charges will be shared by the persons according to the period of their respective possession of the Pass as per NOCs signed by them. Therefore, the claimed area with their respective documents are found genuine for claiming rental compensation for the period of occupation of their land by the Assam Rifles. Enclosed: 1. Genuineness checking Proforma 2. Copies of Passes/LSC/P. Patta. 3. Copies of NOCs. Submitted for favour of information and further necessary action. Yours faithfully, Sd/- 1. (DAWNGKIMA) Deputy Director of Survey (T) Land Revenue & Settlement Mizoram, Aizawl Sd/- 2. (C. LALRINGLIANA) Asst. Director of Survey (I) Land Revenue & Settlement Mizoram, Aizawl." 21. Enclosed: 1. Genuineness checking Proforma 2. Copies of Passes/LSC/P. Patta. 3. Copies of NOCs. Submitted for favour of information and further necessary action. Yours faithfully, Sd/- 1. (DAWNGKIMA) Deputy Director of Survey (T) Land Revenue & Settlement Mizoram, Aizawl Sd/- 2. (C. LALRINGLIANA) Asst. Director of Survey (I) Land Revenue & Settlement Mizoram, Aizawl." 21. From the above abstract of the verification report, it can be seen that the petitioners have been issued their respective Passes by the Revenue authorities and the Assam Rifles on the other hand claimed their rights over the land on the strength of Misc. Pass No. 6/1960. As already noticed earlier, in view of the Notification issued by the erstwhile District Council on 08.08.1970 (Annexure-D), the Communication dated 24.05.1990 (Annexure-E) and the Notification dated 03.09.1992 (Annexure-E-1), the Misc. Pass No. 6/1960 ought to have been converted into Land Lease as was instructed to all Misc. Pass holders. However, the same was not done and therefore, having regard to the same and the subsequent follow ups made by the State Government on 03.10.2007 (Annexure-I), 29.09.2009 (Annexure-J), 20.12.2011 (Annexure-L-2), 27.09.2012 (Annexure-L-3) and 22.02.2013 (Annexure-L-4), I am of the considered opinion that the petitioners cannot be deprived of rental compensation for forcible occupation of their lands w.e.f. 1972 to 2006 as per the assessment made by the State authorities. In so far as non substitution of the petitioner Nos. 39 and 40 are concerned, the same cannot be the basis for depriving them of their dues, inasmuch as, any benefit due to them can be given to their legal heirs. 22. In the result, upon considering the case in its entirety, the petitioners are found to be entitled to rental compensation, amounting to Rs. 21.72 crores, for the period from 1972 to 31.12.2006. The aforesaid amount shall be deposited by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 before the Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Collector, Aizawl (respondent No. 4) within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Thereafter, the deposited amount shall be released to the petitioners on proper identification and as per other formalities as may be required. 23. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of as allowed. No cost.