North East Transmission Company ... vs The State Of Assam And 2 Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 2600 Gua

                                                                     Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010127642023




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                   Case No. : CRP/71/2023

            NORTH EAST TRANSMISSION COMPANY LIMITED
            RANGIRKHARI, SILCHAR, DIST- CACHAR, PIN-788005, ASSAM, REP. BY
            THE MANAGER



            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS
            REP. BY THE COMMISIONER AND SERETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM,
            POWER DEPARTMENT,DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06

            2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
             HAILAKANDI
            ASSAM

            3:MONA MAL
             S/O- LATE MANORANJAN MAL
             R/O VILL- MOHANPUR GRANT
             P.S- ALGAPUR
             DIST- HAILAKANDI
             P.O- MOHANPUR
            ASSAM
             PIN-78815

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. N C DAS

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM
                                                                             Page No.# 2/3


                                   BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

                                       ORDER

Date : 19.06.2023 Heard Mr. N. C. Das, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mrs. M. Devi, the learned counsel for the Petitioner. Ms. Usha Das, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam appears for the Respondent No. 2.

2. Issue notice making it returnable on 9th of August, 2023.

3. Call for the records.

4. The Petitioner is directed to take steps upon the Respondent Nos. 1 & 3 by way of registered post with A/D as well as through usual process within 7 (seven) days. As Ms. U.Das, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the Respondent No. 2, extra copies of the petition be served upon her within 3(three) days.

5. The Petitioner herein is aggrieved by the adjudication made by the Additional District Judge, Hailakandi in exercise of the powers under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, whereby the compensation payable to the Respondent No. 3 had been enhanced and the Petitioner had been directed to pay Rs.6,62,715/- within a period of 3(three) months from the date of the said order along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition. It has also been mentioned that the said amount be paid after deducting the amount already paid to the Respondent No.

3.

6. The case of the Petitioner herein is that the Respondent No. 3 had accepted the compensation without any protest and thereupon had again approached the Additional District Judge, Hailakandi. Mr. N.C. Das, the learned Sr. Counsel therefore submits that since the amount had already been accepted by the Respondent No.3 without any protest, the filing of the application under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act, Page No.# 3/3

1885 was not permissible.

7. Taking into account the above, this Court therefore in the interest of justice stays the impugned judgment and order dated 15/11/2022 passed in Misc. (P.G.) Case No.8/2016 till the next date.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant