Jharkhand High Court
Kushal Nath Munda & Others vs Union Of India & Others on 18 April, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
(Civil Writ Jurisdiction)
W.P. (C) No. 3769 of 2012
........
Kushal Nath Munda & Others .... ..... Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Others .... ..... Respondents
WITH
W.P. (C) No. 3795 of 2012
........
Kushal Nath Munda & Others .... ..... Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Others .... ..... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO
............
For the Petitioners : Mr. Sandeep Verma, Advocate.
[In both cases]
For the Respondents/State : Mr. P.C. Roy, S.C.(L&C)-I.
[In both cases]
For the UOI : Mr. Bakshi Vibha, Advocate.
[In W.P. (C) No. 3769/2012]
Mr. Bharat B. Prasad, Advocate
[In W.P. (C) No. 3795/2012]
For the Resp. Nos. 5, 6 & 7: Mr. Ravindra Chourasiya, A.C. to
Md. Zaid Ahmad, Advocate.
[In W.P. (C) No. 3769/2012]
For the Resp. Nos. 4 to 9 : Mr. Rohit Roy, Advocate.
[In W.P. (C) No. 3795/2012]
........
04/18.04.2022.
W.P. (C) No. 3769 of 2012
Petitioners namely, (1) Kushal Nath Munda, (2) Sakal Nath
Munda, (1) & (2) both sons of Late Madhu Munda, (3) Birsa Munda,
(4) Chhedu Munda, son of Late Jagarnath Munda, (5) Prakash
Munda and (6) Om Prakash Munda, (5) & (6) both sons of Somar
Munda, all resident of Village - Koilari, P.O. & P.S. - Ormanjhi,
District - Ranchi have preferred this writ petition for issuance of
appropriate writ, direction or order, directing the respondents to
show cause as to why the entire proceeding in L.A. Case No. 21 of
2009-10 relating to acquisition of 0.05 acres of land being portion of
R.S. Plot No. 279 of khata no. 27 situated at Village - Koilari, P.S. -
Ormanjhi, District - Ranchi should not be quashed and to quash the
orders dated 05.12.2011 / 12.12.2011 passed by respondent no. 3 in
the said Land Acquisition case contained in Annexure-6 and 7 to this
writ application.
Learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Sandeep Verma has
submitted, that though there is no clear averment in the writ petition
that any objection was filed before the court of District Land
Acquisition Officer, Ranchi in NHAI No. 21/2009-10, but in Para-
19 of the writ petition, it has been stated that there was no
publication of notification under the said Act in accordance with the
provision contained in the Act nor any notice has been issued to the
petitioners, in para-20 of the writ petition, it has been stated that no
inquiry whatsoever was made by respondent nos. 1 to 3 or by any of
the authorities regarding the right title, interest and possession over
the land and in para-21 of the writ petition, it has been stated that it
would not be out of place to mention here that under the said Land
Acquisition Case No. 21 of 2009-10 land measuring 0.04 ½ acres
being portion of R.S. Plot No. 279 of Khata No. 27 of the said
Village, award was prepared in the name of Birsa Munda, petitioner
no. 3 and compensation worth Rs. 1,58,015/- has been paid to him.
The petitioners have filed relevant documents in support of their
claim on 27.01.2011 before disbursement of the amount to Md. Ajij
Ansari, Md. Ejaj Ansari, Rashid Ansari, Anwar Ali and Khusbuddin
Ansari on 12.12.2011, but the same has not been considered while
preparing Award No. 10 in L.A. Case No. 21 of 2009-10.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted, that
the petitioners may be given liberty to place the objection filed
before the court of District Land Acquisition Officer, Ranchi on
27.01.2011 through supplementary affidavit.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted, that
the said land is decided in favour of the writ petitioners by the
learned lower appellate court in terms of judgment dated 19.06.1957
passed in Title Appeal No. 174/29 of 1955/57 even then the Land
Acquisition Officer without referring the matter before the
competent court of law has disbursed the amount.
Learned counsel for the respondents / State, Mr. P.C. Roy, S.C.
(L&C)-I has submitted, that though two matters are pending before
this Court, in the second matter i.e. W.P. (C) No. 3795/2012, counter-
affidavit has already been filed by the State on 27.06.2013, but in the
first matter i.e. W.P. (C) No. 3769/2012, two weeks' time may be
granted to file counter-affidavit.
Learned counsel, Mr. Ravindra Chourasiya, A.C. to learned
counsel, Md. Zaid Ahmad appearing for the private respondents has
submitted, that as per award prepared, which has been brought on
record as Annexure-6 at page-47 of the brief, the money has been
disbursed to the private respondents.
Learned counsel, Mrs. Bakshi Vibha appearing on behalf of
respondent no. 1 / Union of India has submitted that money has
already been handed over to the State Government.
From perusal of office note dated 16.04.2022, it appears that
respondent no. 4, Khusbuddin Ansari, son of Jumauddin Ansari and
respondent no. 8, Anwar Ali, son of Zamir Bux have died during
pendency of the writ petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that, he
wants to implead National Highways Authority of India as party
respondent.
Considering the same, two weeks' time is granted to the
petitioners to file interlocutory application to implead the National
Highways Authority of India as a party respondent.
In the meantime, petitioners shall file substitution petition with
regard to substitution of respondent no. 4, Khusbuddin Ansari and
respondent no. 8, Anwar Ali and also file supplementary affidavit to
bring on record the objection filed in Land Acquisition Case No. 21
of 2009-10.
State counsel shall file counter-affidavit within two weeks.
Private respondents are at liberty to file their counter-affidavit,
if so like.
Let both the matter appear before this Court on 09.05.2022.
In the meantime, parties are directed to exchange their
pleadings.
Office is directed to delete the name of learned counsels, Mr.
Md. Mokhtar Khan and Mr. Srijit Choudhary [In W.P. (C) No.
3769/2012], and learned counsels, Md. Mokhtar Khan, Mr. Srijit
Choudhary and Mr. Rajesh Kumar [In W.P. (C) No. 3795/2012] from
the column of respondents by substituting the name of learned
counsel, Mrs. Bakshi Vibha on behalf of respondent / Union of India
[In W.P. (C) No. 3769/2012] and learned counsel, Mr. P.C. Roy, S.C.
(L&C)-I on behalf of respondents / State (in both cases) in the cause
list.
(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)
Sunil/-
