✦ Meghalaya High Court · 01 Sep 2023

Meghalaya High Court · 2023

MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG WP(C) No. 467 of 20212 min read

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Key paragraphs

  • Para 55. Accordingly, as submitted, the State respondent is hereby directed to complete the process including publication of the said award possibly within a period of 6(six) months from the date of a certified copy of this 2 order.

Judgment

Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Mr. A.G. Momin, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Sen, Sr. GA. with Ms. I. Lyngwa, GA. Mr. A. Momin, GA. i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Law journals etc.: ii) Whether approved for publication in press: Yes/No ORDER (ORAL)

1.

Heard Mr. A.G. Momin, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. S. Sen, learned Sr. GA for the State respondents.

2.

The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the grievance of the petitioners raised in this petition is with regard to the process and procedure followed, wherein the land of the petitioners was 1 acquired for construction of two Laning Shillong – Nongstoin section of NH 44 and Nongstoin – Rongjeng – Tura Road – State Road under Phase “A” of SARDP – NE. Though, it is admitted that the proceedings as per the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was duly followed, however, in course of time, the new Act, that is, the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 came into place, wherein the procedure followed by the said Act deals with matters of acquisition and compensation and for which the present proceedings are now followed.

3.

The grievance of the petitioners is only to the fact that the award is yet to be published, which according to the learned Sr. GA is a procedural matter and at this juncture, the award is likely to be published at any point of time in accordance with due procedure.

4.

The parties agreeing not to agitate the issues raised in this petition on merits, has however, consented that this petition may be disposed of with specific directions to the State respondents to complete the procedure, particularly to publish the said award as expeditiously as possible.

5.

Accordingly, as submitted, the State respondent is hereby directed to complete the process including publication of the said award possibly within a period of 6(six) months from the date of a certified copy of this 2 order.

6.

This will however not prejudice the rights of the petitioners to approach any legal forum, if and when aggrieved by such proceedings.

7.

In view of the above noted directions, this petition is accordingly disposed of. Judge Meghalaya 01.09.2023 “D. Nary, PS” 3

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Meghalaya High Court, on 01 Sep 2023.

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Meghalaya High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG WP(C) No. 467 of 2021). ← Search more judgments