Gauhati High Court
Power Grid Corporation Of India Limited vs The District Commissioner on 21 March, 2025
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010270332024
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : CRP/36/2025
POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED, NER
BADARPUR GHAT, P.O.- BADARPUR GHAT, P.S.- PANCHGRAM, DIST-
HAILAKANDI, PIN-788806, ASSAM, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF
MANAGER NAMELY SHRI NINGTHOUJAM MANTOSH SINGH, AGED
ABOUT 43 YEARS
VERSUS
THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER, HAILAKANDI AND ANR
DIST- HAILAKANDI
2:MD. JAYNUL ISLAM BARBHUIYA
S/O LATE ARJOMOND BARBHUIYA
VILL- BAHADURPUR PART-II
P.S. AND DIST- HAILAKANDI
ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : N KHERA,
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM,
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN
ORDER
Date : -21.03.2025
Heard Mr. R. Sarma, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. N. Khera,
learned counsel and Mr. T. Marngar, learned counsel for the petitioner and also
Page No.# 2/3
heard Mrs. D. D. Barman, learned Senior Government Advocate for the
respondent No.1.
2. In this petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the
petitioner has put to challenge the common judgment and order dated
04.11.2023, passed in Misc (P.G.) case No.05/2018 by the learned Additional
District Judge, Hailakandi, wherein the petitioner/opposite party No.1 was
directed to make payment of an amount of Rs. 14,16,800/- to the respondent
No.2, towards compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date
of filing the claim petition as against making payment of Rs. 7,05,766/- as
assessed by the Revenue Authorities.
3. Mr. Sarma, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the
respondent No.2 was already paid a sum of Rs.7,05,760/- being the
compensation as assessed by the Revenue Authorities and the respondent No.2
has received the same without any protest. Thereafter, he filed a petition dated
03.03.2018, under Section 16(3) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 before the
learned District Judge, Hailakandi for enhancement of the compensation and the
learned Additional District Judge, Hailakandi enhanced the same illegally as well
as arbitrarily and it is in contravention to the material on record.
4. Having heard the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner and
documents placed on record, it is provided that let notice be issued to the
respondent No.2, within a week from today, returnable in 4 weeks, by registered
post with A/D and usual process. As Mrs. Barman, has appeared and accepted
Page No.# 3/3
notice on behalf of the respondent No.1, no formal notice is required to be
issued. However, extra requisite copy of the petition be furnished to the State
respondent during the course of the day.
5. Considering the submission of learned counsel for both the parties and also
considering the facts and circumstances on the record, the impugned judgment
and order dated 04.11.2023, passed in Misc (P.G.) case No.05/2018 by the
learned Additional District Judge, Hailakandi stands stayed till returnable date.
6. List the matter after 4 [four] weeks.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
