Kauleshwar Thakur vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 2319 Jhar

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                        W.P.(C) No. 1249 of 2022
                Kauleshwar Thakur                                             ..... Petitioner
                                                    Versus
                1. The State of Jharkhand
                2. The Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of
                Jharkhand, Ranchi
                3. The Deputy Commissioner, Ramgarh
                4. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Ramgarh
                5. The Circle Officer, Patratu, Ramgarh
                6. Patratu Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited, through its CEO, Patratu, Ramgarh
                7. Ravindra Mistri                                            ..... Respondents
                                                     -----

CORAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

-----

                For the Petitioner:          Mr. Ranjit Kumar
                For the State:               Mr. Aishwarya Prakash, A.C to S.C (Mines)-I
                                                     -----

02/28.06.2022          The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the

respondent No.3 to take appropriate decision on the petitioner's representation

filed for payment of compensation in lieu of acquisition of the land appertaining

to Khata No. 66, Plot Nos. 1163 (which according to the petitioner, is a

typographical mistake and the same should have been mentioned as Plot No.

1183) & 1185, Mouza-Sankul, P.S-Patratu, District-Ramgarh, measuring an area

of 0.86 & 0.85 Acre respectively in the light of the judgment and decree dated

31.08.2017 & 04.09.2017 respectively passed by the Senior Civil Judge-IV,

Ramgarh in Partition Suit No. 20/2012. Further prayer has been made for

issuance of direction upon the respondents to identify the actual land losers and

to make payment of compensation to the persons, who are actually entitled for

the same as per the aforesaid judgment and decree.

The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the aforesaid judgment

and decree, the respondents have decided to make payment of compensation

for acquisition of the said land in favour of the respondent No.7.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering that the

process to make payment of compensation for acquisition of different land has

been initiated as per respective awards prepared in favour of the land losers, as

would be evident from the decision of the respondent No.4 dated 11.12.2021, a

copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition, the petitioner should have taken alternative/statutory/efficacious recourse by

making counter claim against the award in question prepared in favour of the

respondent No.7 under the appropriate provision of the Right to Fair

Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and

Resettlement Act, 2013. Hence, this Court is not inclined to entertain the

present writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed.

The petitioner is however at liberty to take alternative/

statutory/efficacious recourse for redressal of his grievance as provided under

law.

Satish/-                                                            (RAJESH SHANKAR, J)