North East Transmission Company ... vs The State Of Assam And 2 Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 2662 Gua

                                                               Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010135672023




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

                                   Case No. : CRP/80/2023

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



            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS
            REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE
            GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM,
            POWER DEPTT., DISPUR,
            GUWAHATI-6.

            2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
             HAILAKANDI
             DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI.

            3:AJANTA MAL
            W/ SHRI SUNTU MAL

            R/O- VILL. MOHANPUR GRANT

            P.O.- MOHANPUR
             P.S.- ALGAPUR

            DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI
            ASSAM

            PIN- 788150

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. N C DAS
                                                                          Page No.# 2/3

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM




                                      BEFORE
                   HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
                                 ORDER

22.06.2023

Heard Mr. N. C. Das, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mrs. M. Devi, the learned counsel for the Petitioner and Ms. U. Das, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam appears for the respondent Nos. 1 & 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 No. 3 by way of registered post with A/D as well as through usual process within 7 (seven) days.

5. As Ms. U. Das, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 & 2, extra copies of the writ petition be served upon her within 3 (three) days.

6. 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.3,59,915/- 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 Page No.# 3/3

that the said amount be paid after deducting the amount already paid to the respondent No.3.

7. 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 senior 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, 1885 was not permissible.

8. Taking into account the above, this Court therefore in the interest of justice stays the impugned judgment and order dated 10.08.2022 passed in Misc. (P.G.) Case No.10/2016 till the next date.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant