Jharkhand High Court
Ramdev Kumar vs The Secretary on 15 October, 2024
Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary
Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(C) No. 2876 of 2018
Ramdev Kumar, aged about 19 years, son of Laldhari Thakur, resident
of Village - Konara, P.O. + P.S. - Barhi, Distt - Hazaribagh
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The Secretary, Department of land revenue and land reforms,
Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O. & P.S. - Dhurwa, Ranchi
2. Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh, P.O. & P.S. - Hazaribagh
3. Project Director, National Highway Authority, Govindpur,
Dhanbad, P.O. & P.S. Govindpur, Dhanbad.
4. Land Acquisition Officer, Hazaribagh, P.O. & P.S. Hazaribagh,
Hazaribagh ... ... Respondents
---
CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
---
For the Petitioner : Mr. Nilendu Kumar, Advocate
For the NHAI : Mrs. Sweety Topno, Advocate
: Mr. Amrit Raj Kisku, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Prashant Kr. Rai, Advocate
---
17/15.10.2024 Heard the learned counsels for the parties.
2. This writ petition has been filed for the following relief:
"That, in the instant writ petition, the above named petitioner prays for
issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/Rule(s)/order(s)/direction(s), or a writ in the
nature of Mandamus commanding upon the respondent to forthwith release the
entire compensation amount of Rs.86,54,829/- (Eighty six lakhs fifty four thousand
eight hundred and twenty nine) along with the statutory interest against
acquisition of 40 decimals of land belonging to the petitioner under "The Right to
Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013.
And
For issuance of such other Writ/Rule/Order/Directions as Your Lordships
may deem fit and proper."
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
land in the present case was acquired by National Highway Authority
for the purposes of construction of National Highway way back in the
year 2000-2001. The National Highway Authority of India (NHAI)
paid certain amount to the State Government by treating the land as
Gair Majurwa i.e. Government land. However, the learned counsel has
referred to Letter No.940 dated 03.09.2015 issued by the office of
Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh wherein certain communications/
decisions have been mentioned indicating that some portion of the
land is not government land. The learned counsel submits that under
such circumstances, the petitioner is entitled for compensation, which
has not been paid to the petitioner, and therefore, the present writ
petition has been filed.
4. The learned counsel for the NHAI has opposed the prayer and
submitted that once the amount has already been paid to the State
government, subsequent communication and decisions of the State
government has no value and if at all the petitioner has any dispute,
then the same is a title dispute between the private party and NHAI, in
which, the State would also be a necessary party.
5. The learned counsel has referred to Section 3H (4) of the
National Highways Act and submitted that such dispute can be
resolved through a competent court of civil jurisdiction. She submits
that the competent authority to refer such dispute is the District Land
Acquisition Officer. She has also submitted that the petitioner may
approach District Land Acquisition Officer and there can be no reason
that the dispute be not referred to the court by the said authority.
NHAI will have no objection if the dispute is referred for adjudication
by the court.
6. She has also relied upon the judgments passed by this Court in
W.P.(C) No. 5082 of 2017 dated 19.07.2023 and also the judgment
passed in W.P.(C) No. 1832 of 2017 decided on 12.05.2023 wherein
various other judgments have also been referred.
7. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of this case, it appears that
after the acquisition of land way back in the year 2000-2001, there has
been certain developments and the petitioner is claiming certain right
arising out of such subsequent developments.
8. This Court is of the considered view that there is dispute in
connection with right, title and interest in connection with the acquired
land by NHAI and such dispute cannot be resolved through writ
jurisdiction. Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to grant the relief
as prayed for by the petitioner in this writ petition.
9. The law is well settled that the dispute regarding title is to be
adjudicated by a competent court of civil jurisdiction upon decision
being taken in terms of Section 3H (4) of the National Highways Act.
10. Accordingly, to get the dispute adjudicated, the petitioner is at
liberty to approach concerned District Land Acquisition Officer and in
view of the points raised and recorded herein above, the said authority
is directed to pass appropriate order within the period of one month
from the date of filing of such petition so that the dispute is ultimately
adjudicated through a competent court of civil jurisdiction. The order
to be passed by the concerned District Land Acquisition Officer be
communicated to the concerned parties through speed post.
11. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
12. Pending interlocutory application, if any, stands closed.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Saurav/-
