THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM v. THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Be that as it may, the present writ petition is disposed of, permitting the
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. This writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Judgment
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2089/2025 JAHAN UDDIN LASKAR AND 2 ORS. S/O NASIM UDDIN LASKAR, R/O VILL NEAIRGRAM PART II, P.S- SILCHAR, DISTRICT- CACHAR, ASSAM-788013 2: ALI AKBAR LASKAR S/O NASIM UDDIN LASKAR R/O VILL NEAIRGRAM PART II P.S- SILCHAR DISTRICT- CACHAR ASSAM-788013 3: NASIM UDDIN LASKAR S/O LATE TASABBUR ALI LASKAR R/O VILL NEAIRGRAM PART II P.S- SILCHAR DISTRICT- CACHAR ASSAM-78801 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS. REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS, TRANSPORT BHAWAN, 1, PARLIAMENT STREET, NEW DELHI-110001 2:THE NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA REGIONAL OFFICE AT GUWAHATI NEDFI HOUSE 4TH FLOOR G.S. ROAD DISPUR GUWAHATI- 06. 3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER CACHAR Page No.# 2/3 SILCHAR P.O- SILCHAR. DISTRICT- CACHAR PIN-788001 4:THE ADDL. DISTRICT COMMISSIONER (REVENUE) LAND ACQUISITION DISTRICT- CACHAR. PIN-788001. 5:THE GENERAL MANAGER (PROJECT) PMU- SILCHAR NHIDCL PESKAR LANE SONAI ROAD KANAKPUR PART I SILCHAR- 78800 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. L R MAZUMDER, MR. A ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., SC, NHAI,SC, NHIDC,GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
23.04.2025 ORDER
Heard Mr. L. R. Mazumder, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. R. Borah, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 5 and Mr. S. S. Roy, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 3 and 4.
According to the petitioners, the petitioner’s land has been acquired pursuant to a land acquisition proceeding carried out in terms of the National Highways Act, 1956. It is the grievance of the petitioners that the zirat compensation is not sufficient and zirat ought to have been higher than what is determined.
According to the petitioners, they have filed an application before the competent authority. However, nothing has been done by the competent authority.
This Court has perused the representation purportedly, filed by the petitioners Page No.# 3/3 raising such issues, however, such representation dated 06.02.2025 (Annexure-6) is not made to the competent authority of Land Acquisition (CALA) under the National Highways Act, and the representation is filed for enhancement of zirat only.
Operative part
Be that as it may, the present writ petition is disposed of, permitting the petitioners to take recourse to the remedies under Section 3G(5.) of National Highways Act, 1956.
This writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Be that as it may, the present writ petition is disposed of, permitting the
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
National Highways Act, 1956; National Highways Act.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.