Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 900 (JHR)

Harihar Prasad Gupta v. State of Jharkhand

2023-07-19

RAJESH SHANKAR

body2023
JUDGMENT : W.P.(C) No. 6019 of 2019 The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent nos. 7, 8 and 9 to pay appropriate compensation along with statutory interest as per the order dated 27.02.2017 passed by the respondent no. 3 – the Additional Collector, Chatra in Misc. Case No. 06/2016-17 with respect to the land appertaining to Khata No. 134, Plot Nos. 40, 438/4, 1172/3, 1302/6, 1205/2 and 1100/2, measuring an area of 0.15 acre, 0.34 acre, 1.00 acre, 0.85 acre, 1.35 acre and 1.00 acre respectively (total 4.69 acres), acquired at the instance of the respondent-National Thermal Power Corporation Limited (NTPC Limited), Karnpura Project, Tandwa, Chatra. W.P.(C) No. 6019 of 2019 The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent nos. 7, 8 and 9 to pay appropriate compensation along with statutory interest as per the order dated 27.02.2017 passed by the respondent no. 3 – the Additional Collector, Chatra in Misc. Case No. 07/2016-17 with respect to the land appertaining to Khata No. 134, Plot Nos. 1066 & 450, measuring an area of 2.05 acres and 3.65 acres respectively (total 5.70 acres), acquired at the instance of the respondent-National Thermal Power Corporation Limited (NTPC Limited), Karnpura Project, Tandwa, Chatra. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the orders dated 27.02.2017 passed by the respondent no. 3 in Misc. Case No. 06/2016-17 and Misc. Case No. 07/2016-17 were challenged by the respondent – NTPC Limited before the Revisional Authority i.e., the Commissioner, North Chotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh being Revenue Revision No. 132/2019. However, the said revision was dismissed by the Revisional Authority being time barred vide order dated 05.03.2020. Aggrieved with the said order passed by the Revisional Authority, the respondent – NTPC Limited preferred a writ petition before this Court being W.P.(C) No. 1696 of 2020 which was disposed of vide order dated 02.09.2021, whereby the order dated 05.03.2020 passed by the Revisional Authority was quashed with a direction to the said authority to hear and dispose of Revenue Revision No. 132/2019 on merit. The petitioner was respondent no. 13 in the said writ petition. 3. Mr. Prashant Pallav, learned DSGI appearing on behalf of the respondent-NTPC Limited, submits that on remand, Revenue Revision No. 132/2019 is still pending before the Revisional Authority. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. The petitioner was respondent no. 13 in the said writ petition. 3. Mr. Prashant Pallav, learned DSGI appearing on behalf of the respondent-NTPC Limited, submits that on remand, Revenue Revision No. 132/2019 is still pending before the Revisional Authority. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 5. The relevant part of order dated 02.09.2021 passed in W.P.(C) No. 1696 of 2020 is quoted hereunder for ready reference: 1. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing/setting aside the order dated 5th March, 2020 passed by the Commissioner, North Chotanapur Division, Hazaribagh- respondent no.3/revisional authority in Revenue Revision No.132 of 2019 (wrongly typed as 132/2010), whereby the said revisional authority has declined to interfere with the finding of the Additional Collector, Chatra- respondent no.4 on the ground that the revision application preferred by the petitioner was time barred. 2. Mr. Prashant Pallav, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that by way of filing Revenue Revision No.132 of 2019 before the respondent no.3, the petitioner challenged the orders passed by the respondent no.4, directing the petitioner-NTPC to pay compensation to the private respondents for their acquired land. The petitioner in its memo of revision had taken several grounds for assailing different orders passed by the respondent no.4 including that it was not served any notice before passing the said orders, hence the same were in violation of the principle of natural justice. Though there was a delay in filing the said revision application before the respondent no.3 and an application for condonation of delay was also not filed, the said respondent should have at least given an opportunity to the petitioner for filing application for condonation of delay instead of summarily rejecting the revision application preferred by the petitioner. 3. Mr. Manish Mishra, learned G.P.V, appearing on behalf of the State respondents, Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent no.13 and Mr. Ratnesh Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent nos.9 to 12, 14 and 16 to 26, jointly contend that the claims of the private respondents with respect to compensation in lieu of their acquired land are justified, yet fairly submit that they have no objection, if the matter is remanded to the revisional authority/respondent no.3 for considering the same on merit. 4. 4. Keeping in view the submission of learned counsel for the parties as well as that the claims of the private respondents vis-à-vis the stand of the petitioner regarding payment of compensation in lieu of the acquired land are required to be considered by the revisional authority/respondent no.3 on merit, the impugned order dated 5th March, 2020 is hereby quashed/set aside. The matter is remanded to the said respondent, giving liberty to the petitioner to file an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in preferring the said revision application before the respondent no.3 within a period of two weeks. The respondent no.3 in turn is directed to consider the same liberally and to hear and dispose of the revision application preferred by the petitioner on merit after providing due opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties within a period of four months thereafter. 5. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of with the aforesaid liberty and direction. 6. Since Revenue Revision No. 132/2019 filed by the NTPC Limited against the orders dated 27.02.2017 passed by the respondent no. 3 in Misc. Case Nos. 06/2016-17 and 07/2016-17 and other similar orders is pending before the Revisional Authority in which the petitioner is also a party respondent, there is no need to further proceed in the present cases. 7. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of. The parties are at liberty to pursue their respective cases before the Revisional Authority.