MATAP MARK Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA
LAWS(MEGH)-2013-11-8
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
Decided on November 15,2013

Matap Mark Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF MEGHALAYA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

T.NANDAKUMAR SINGH, J. - (1.) BY this writ petition, the petitioner is praying for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay compensation for the land measuring about 59 bighas purported to have been taken over by the Fisheries Department, Govt. of Meghalaya, Shillong more than 20 years ago by drawing up land acquisition proceeding. There is a considerable delay of more than one decade in approaching the court by the writ petitioner for the relief sought for in the present writ petition.
(2.) HEARD Mr. HR Nath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. H Kharmih, learned GA appearing for the State respondents. The succinct fact sufficient for deciding the matter in issue in the present writ petition is recapitulated that the petitioner is the recognized Akhing Nokma of Jamge Akhing and as an Akhing Nokma, he is the owner and manager of the Akhing land including the land in question said to have been taken over by the Govt. of Meghalaya, Fisheries Department. The pleaded case of the petitioner in para 3 of the writ petition is that the respondents had taken possession of 104 bighas of land in Jamge Akhing in the year 1989. Out of the said 104 bighas, 45.12 bighas were acquired with due process under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Save and except the said pleadings in the writ petition, there is no material pleadings supported by the documents that in the year 1989 the Akhing land measuring about 104 bighas had been taken over by the Govt. for the Fisheries Department. It is the further case of the petitioner that the Deputy Commissioner handed over the land measuring 45 bighas 12 lessa to the Fishery Department on 19.05.1989 and certificate for taking over of the said land by the Department was also issued i.e. certificate No.EGH/REV 132/83/75 dated Williamnagar 19.05.1989 (Annexure -I to the writ petition). The respondents along with the said 45 bighas 12 lessa of land had possessed the remaining area measuring about 59 bighas i.e. whole 104 bighas without following the due acquisition process and also the respondents did not pay the compensation or rent to the petitioner for the said 59 bighas since they had taken the possession of the whole 104 bighas of land.
(3.) THE petitioner further states that the Deputy Commissioner, East Garo Hills, Meghalaya (respondent No.4) on 08.10.2007 wrote a letter to the Director of Fisheries, Meghalaya, Shillong (respondent No.3) mentioning that after careful examination of the map and original sketch map, the excess land claimed by the petitioner comes to 59 bighas and requested the respondent No.3 to sanction a total amount of Rs.59,35,164.00/ - and to pay it to the petitioner. For claiming that after acquiring 45 bighas and 12 lessa out of 104 bighas, the Fisheries Department had possessed the remaining 59 bighas without paying any compensation, the petitioner placed heavy reliance on the said letter of the Deputy Commissioner dated 08.10.2007. Since the petitioner had placed heavy reliance on the said letter of the Deputy Commissioner dated 08.10.2007 for the relief sought for in the present writ petition, it would be more profitable and convenience to reproduce the letter hereunder: - ''GOVERNMENT OF MEGHALAYA OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, EAST GARO HILLS DISTRICT ::: WILLIAMNAGAR. No.EGH/REV.132/83/145,dated Williamnagar, the 8th October, 2007. From: The Deputy Commissioner, East Garo Hills, Williamnagar. To, The Director of Fisheries, Meghalaya, Shillong. Sub: Acquisition of land by Fishery Department Govt. of Meghalaya at Songsak (Jamge). Ref: Letter No.MEG/PISC/3102/86 -87/98 dt.2.8.2007. Madam, In continuation of this office letter No.EHG/REV.132/83/142 dtd.5.9.2007, I have the honour to state that the joint verification of the acquired area of land could not be conducted on 18.9.2007. As the G.D.C. representative did not turn up without any information to the undersigned. However, basing on the area of map traced out by the G.D.C. itself (copy enclosed) following probable facts are being intimated herewith for your information and necessary action. 1. That as per availability of office records, it is a fact that the physical possession of land of 45.12 bighas only has been done on 19.5.1989 vide letter No.EGH/REV.132/83/75, dtd.19.5.1989 (copy enclosed). Accordingly, the payment of land compensation amounting to Rs.2,82,576/ - as sanctioned vide Fishery Department letter No.MEG/PISC/3419/88 -89/18 dtd.25.4.1989 has also been made for 45.12 bighas. 2. That on careful examination of above mentioned map and the original sketch map, it can be found that the excess quantum of land as lciamed by the Nokma comes to 59 bighas (i.e.104 -45.12 -59). Both copy of sketch map enclosed for your ready reference. 3. Based on the above clarifications, the balance amount of land compensation for the excess quantum of land i.e. for 59 bighas come to Rs.59,35,164/ - as per latest enhanced rate notified vide G.D.C 's Letter No.GDCREV/ 1107/06/2448 -60, dtd.26.5.2006. The calculation of the above estimated amount has included all the mandatory provisions under L.A. Act as below: - (a) Cost of land - 35,40,000.00 (b) 30% Solatium - 10,62,000.00 (c) 12% Interest for three years - 12,74,400.00 (d) 10% Contingency and - 58,764.00 Establishment Charge Total - Rs.59,35,164.00 In view of this, I would therefore, request you to kindly examine the matter and sanction the balance amount of compensation for Rs.59,35,164.00 which is supposed to be paid to the petitioner so as to settle the problem at the earliest possible. This is for your information and necessary action. Sd/ - Deputy Commissioner, East Garo Hills District, Williamnagar. '' ;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.