High Court · 2012

We have heard Mr H Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitoiner; Mr PS D eka, learned State counsel for the respondent Nos. 1,3,4 and 5 and Ms D Sinha, l earned Central Govt. counsel for the respondent No.2, Union of India. The facts in brief necessary for the disposal of the instant petition ar e that the petitioner claims herself to be an indigenous inhabitant of the State of Assam belonging to the Lalung Tribe which is a Scheduled Tribe under the Co nstitution of India (Scheduled Tribe) Order, 1950 (as amended). A plot of land m easuring 4 Bighas 15 Lechas covered by Dag No. 14 of KP Patta No. 25 situated a t Village Sialekhaiti, Mouza Panbari in which she held title on devolution of in terest had been acquired in connection with the aforementioned L.A. Case. Though according to the petitoner, the possession of the land had been taken over in c onnection with the land acquisition proceeding in the year 2008 and in response to the notice issued by the concerned respondent authority she had submitted her claim for compensation supported by the necessary documents, the amount due to her has not yet been reelased. Having come to learn eventually from the office o f the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup that the stalemate is due to the order dated 4 .2.2009 passed by this Court in WP(C) No.404/2009, she has approached this Court . The petitioner has mentioned further about the order dated 30.5.2011 passed by t his Court in MC 164/2011 arising out of WP(C) No.404/2009 whereby the jurisdicti onal Collector has been directed to verify the claim of the applicant therein re garding his status and entitlement to occupy the land acquired and to compute an d release the amount of compensation payable to him in law. Mr Talukdar has urged that as the petitioner is similarly situated with the applicant in MC 164/2011, an identical order ought to be passed in her favou r in the interest of justice. Whereas Mr Deka has submitted that in view of the interim restraint cont ained in the order dated 4.2.2009 passed in WP(C) 404/2009 it may not be possibl e for the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup to release any amount in favour fo the pet itioner, Ms Sinha with reference to the parawise comments laid with her by the r espondent Union of India has submitted that meanwhile an amount of Rs. 18,30,20, 368/- by way of compensation amount has already been deposited with the Deputy C ommissioner, Kamrup. We have perused the pleadings and have considered as well the submission s advanced. From the averments made in the petition and the photocopy of the ce rtificate issued by the All Assam Tribal Sangha it prima facie appears that the petitioner belongs to the Lalung Tribe (P) of the State of Assam. The order dat ed 30.5.2011 rendered in MC 164/2011 discloses that in WP(C) 404/2009 the assail ment is vis-à-vis the transfer of land under Schedule X of the Assam Land & Reve nue Regulations, 1886, the plea being that such a conveyance thereunder in favou r of a non-tribal is impermissible in law. It was in the backdrop of such a chal lenge that the interim order dated 4.2.2009 was passed prohibiting disbursement of compensation to anyone qua the land involved without the leave of the Court. The applicant in the aforementioned Misc. case was not a party to the sa id writ proceeding but got himself impleaded thereafter as respondent No.15 and his land as well was involved in the same Land Acquisition case. His grievance w as also identical to that of the petitioner herein. As the order would further r eveal, the stand of the learned State counsel was that the District Collector wo uld verify the claim of the applicant and that if his land was acquired in the a cquisition proceeding and if he was entitled to receive the compensation , the s ame would be released to him. On a consideration of the relevant facts, the fol lowing operative direction was issued: (cid:28)That being the position, the present application is disposed of directing the C ollector to verify the claim of the applicant regarding his status and entitleme nt to occupy land in tribal belt and if the applicant is found to be entitled to possess the land and also to any compensation, his share of estimated compensat ion claim as deposited shall be released. Interim ordre dated 04.02.2009 is acco rdingly modified to the extent as indicated above. (cid:29). Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on a consideration of the materials on record, we are of the view that a similar approach would mee t the ends of justice. The instant petition, therefore, stands disposed with a direction to the jurisdi ctional Collector to verify whether the land is located in the Tribal Belt, her tribal status, her title to and possession of the land involved and her entitlem ent to occupy the same. If on a scrutiny of all these aspects the petitioner is found entitled to any compensation for the land acquired vide L.A. Case No. 8/20 05, the said authority would compute the same and defray it to her. The interim order dated 4.2.2009 would stand modified vis-à-vis the petitioner to this exten t. Though ideally the petitioner ought to have approached the learned Singl e Judge with an application in WP(C) 404/09 for the necessary modification of th e interim order as above, in the singular facts of the case considering her grie vance on the delay in disbursement of the amount of compensation, we have chosen to entertain this petition. The entire exercise as ordered should be completed within a period of si x weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. This order would not be construed to be a precedent for any purpose. The petition stands allowed in the above terms. No costs.