Decided on March 23,2022



I.MAHANTY; CJ. - (1.)Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.
The petitioner was the owner of .11 acres of land for which acquisition has taken place for construction of a Lay-Bye near Haripur Market on Belonia-Nalua Road under Belonia Sub-Division. Challenging the said acquisition notice himself, a writ petition had come to be filed by the petitioner registered as WP(C) No. 388 of 2013. This Hon'ble Court by its judgment dtd. 18/3/2014 rejected the said writ petition and upheld the acquisition made and admittedly in the present case the compensation that was awarded in the land acquisition proceedings has also been released in favour of the writ petitioner.

(2.)In the present writ petition, the essential contention raised by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner is that although the land was acquired for the purported reasons for making a road Lay-Bye as noted hereinabove, part of the land had used by the village panchayat to construct shop rooms thereof. In response to such contention raised by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner, a counter affidavit has come to be filed by the State. Paragraph 10 of the counter affidavit is quoted as under:
"10. That, with regards Para 9 of the petition, I submit that the land was acquired for the purpose for which it was so acquired. The role of the Revenue Department and the answering respondents was to acquire the land in accordance with Land Acquisition Act, 1984. There is no decision of the Revenue Administration to construct any stall in the Haripur Market on Lay Bye. The Revenue Department has not budgetary allocation also for the kind of purpose. Therefore, the allegation of the petitioner is misconceived so far answering respondents are concerned.

However, after the receipt of notice of the writ petition the District Administration caused an enquiry and found that market stall has been constructed in one end side of the lay bye road and the same was constructed as per decision taken by the Finance Standing Committee meeting of Hrishyamukh Panchayat Samiti decision dtd. 20/9/2014 just six months later of judgment and order dtd. 18/3/2014 passed in Case No. WP(C) 388/2013."

(3.)Apart from the above, the learned Government Advocate drew our attention to a further notification issued by the Government of Tripura dtd. 21/11/2017 in which it indicates that substantial money has already been allocated for widening of various State Highways including the highway in question along which the acquired land also figures.

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