Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 730 (JHR)

Raj Kishore Mahato v. State of Jharkhand

2019-03-15

SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD

body2019
ORDER : This writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking direction upon the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners for enhancement of the amount of compensation as per the market value by modifying the award in L.A. Case No. 01 of 2012-13, having the land acquired for the construction of widening of road acquired over Khata No. 11, Plot No. 566 measuring an area of 68 feet x 59 feet shown as Kachha Makan, measuring an area 33 feet of stone boundary wall and measuring 47 feet x 15 feet shown as Pakka Makan for the petitioner No.1; Khata No. 12, Plot No. 551 measuring an area of 37 feet x 49 feet and 28 feet x 25 feet shown as Kachha Makan of the petitioner No.2; Khata No. 76, Plot No. 553 measuring an area of 50 feet x 13 feet and 27 feet x 22 feet shown as Kachha Makan in both plot of the petitioner No.3, Khata No. 14, Plot No. 572 measuring an area of 21 feet x 35 feet shown as Pakka Makan of the petitioner No.4; Khata No. 12, Plot No. 547 measuring an area of 68 feet x 42 feet shown as Kachha Makan of the petitioner No.5; Khata No. 15, Plot No. 574 measuring an area, shown as Makan of the petitioner No.6; Khata No. 12, Plot No. 551 measuring an area of 47 feet x 48 feet and Khata No. 12, Plot No. 547 measuring an Area 38 feet x 23 feet both shown as Kachha Makan of the petitioner No.7; Khata No. 14, Plot No. 570 measuring an area of 22 feet x 35 feet shown as Pakka Makan of the petitioner No.9; Khata No. 14, Plot No. 570 measuring an area of 26 feet x 55 feet shown as Kachha Makan of the petitioner No. 10; Khata No. 12, Plot No. 546 measuring an area of 47 feet x 46 feet shown as Kachha Makan of the petitioner No. 11; Khata No. 33, Plot No. 544 measuring an Area of 37 feet x 44 feet shown as Kachha Makan of the petitioner No. 12; Khata No. 14, Plot No. 569 measuring an area of 34 feet x 13 feet shown as Pakka Makan and 25 feet x 37 feet shown as Kachha Makan of the petitioner No. 13; Khata No. 11, Plot No. 566 measuring an area of 38 feet x 72 feet shown as Kachha Makan and 130 feet long boundary wall of the petitioner No. 14, Khata No. 15, Plot No. 561 measuring an area of 28 x 24 feet shown as Pakka Makan and 44 feet x 29 feet shown as Kachha Makan of the petition No. 16; Khata No. 12, Plot No. 551 measuring an area of 26 feet x 26 feet and 28 feet x 32 feet shown as Kachha Makan of the petitioner No. 17 and the land of the petitioner Nos. 8 and 15 have not been measured. 2. Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, learned senior counsel for the petitioners at the outset, has submitted that petitioner have made an application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as would be evident from Annexure-2 annexed to the writ petition, therefore, concerned authority may be directed to take decision in accordance with law upon the application dated 22.08.2014 since the same is pending. 3. Ms. Pooja Kumari, A.C. to S.C.-III for the respondent has submitted that these petitioners should only approach before the appropriate authority by making application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 but the other land losers have accepted the amount of compensation, therefore it is not a fit case for enhancement of the compensation. 4. Be that as it may, since the petitioners have approached this Court for issuance of direction for enhancement of compensation but in course of argument it has been submitted by learned senior counsel representing the petitioners that the said grievance for enhancement since is to be adjudicated by way of reference to be made under the provision of Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and since the petitioners have filed due application invoking the provision as contemplated under Section 18 of the Act, therefore, writ petition may be disposed of directing the concerned authority to take decision, this Court therefore is not delving into the issue on merit of the claim of the petitioner rather considering the fact that the petitioner has confined his prayer only with respect to consideration of the petition as contained under Annexure-2, disposing of the writ petition without entering into the claim of the petitioners by directing the respondent No.2 to take decision on the application/petition filed by the petitioners under Section 18 of the Act, 1894, if not already disposed of, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, in accordance with law. 5. The writ petition is, accordingly disposed of.