THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK
(Civil Jurisdiction)
Dated : 12th of October, 2023
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SINGLE BENCH : THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI MADAN RAI, JUDGE
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cont. Cas(C) No.03 of 2023
Petitioners : Man Kumar Basnett and Others
versus
Respondents : Tashi Chopel and Another
and
Cont. Cas(C) No.04 of 2023
Petitioners : Matrika Prasad Sharma and Others
versus
Respondents : Tashi Chopel and Another
Petitions under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts
Act, 1971 and under Article 215 of the Constitution of India
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appearance
Mr. N. Rai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Yozan Rai and Ms. Tara Devi
Chettri, Advocates for the Petitioners.
Mr. Zangpo Sherpa, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Sujan
Sunwar, Assistant Government Advocate for the Respondent No.1.
Mr. Debal Kumar Banerji, Senior Advocate with Ms. Gita Bista and
Pratikcha Gurung, Advocates for the Respondent No.2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
Meenakshi Madan Rai, J.
1. These two Contempt cases being Cont. Cas(C) No.03 of
2023 and Cont. Cas(C) No.04 of 2023 are being disposed of by this
common Judgment.
2. The Learned Single Judge of this Court vide Judgments
in WP(C) No.25 of 2022 and WP(C) No. 50 of 2022, both dated 29-
05-2023, ordered inter alia as follows;
"5. During the course of the final hearing, the Learned Additional Advocate General for the Respondents No.3 and 4 and Learned Senior Advocate appearing for Respondent No.2 submit that they have no issue if the Petitioners restrict their claim to the respective Parcha Khatiyans and that they are willing to ensure that they do not carry out any of their activities in the areas specified in the Parcha Cont. Cas(C) No.03 of 2023 : Man Kumar Basnett and Others vs. Tashi Chopel and Another 2 and Cont. Cas(C) No.04 of 2023 : Matrika Prasad Sharma and Others vs. Tashi Chopel and Another
Khatiyans to be the landed properties of the Petitioners.
6. The Learned Senior Advocate for the Petitioners, on instructions received from the Petitioners, submit that if this Court would protect their ownership rights as reflected in the respective Parcha Khatiyans, they would not protest the Project Work undertaken by the Respondents of expanding the National Highway.
7. In view of the clear understanding between the parties, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition without examining the merits of the issues raised by the parties by allowing the Respondents to continue with the infrastructural project of expansion of the National Highway duly ensuring that they do not infringe upon the Petitioners' rights of ownership of the plot numbers, as specified above, without following the due process of law."
(i) It is thus clear that the Learned Court had specifically
ordered that without examining the merits of the issues raised by
the parties, the Respondents be allowed to continue with the
infrastructural project of expansion of the National Highway, duly
ensuring that they do not infringe upon the Petitioners' rights of
ownership of the plot numbers as specified in their respective
Parcha Khatiyans, without following due process of law.
3. Alleging that there was a wilful disobedience of the said
Order, the Contempt Jurisdiction of this Court was invoked by the
Petitioners herein, i.e., Man Kumar Basnett, Prakash Subba and Bal
Kumar Rai in Cont. Cas(C) No.03 of 2023, and Matrika Prasad
Sharma, Kailash Rana Manger and Pavitra Maya Subba in Cont.
Cas(C) No.04 of 2023.
4. After hearing Learned Counsel for the parties on 04-08-
2023 in the presence of Learned Counsel for all the parties this
Court recorded inter alia as follows;
"...................................In view of the averments made in the pleadings and the submissions put forth before this Court, Learned Additional Advocate General assures this Court that the State-Respondent will examine the allegations and take requisite appropriate measures................................"
Cont. Cas(C) No.03 of 2023 : Man Kumar Basnett and Others vs. Tashi Chopel and Another 3 and Cont. Cas(C) No.04 of 2023 : Matrika Prasad Sharma and Others vs. Tashi Chopel and Another
The State-Respondent No.1 was afforded time to enable it to
act upon the assurance.
(i) On 17-08-2023, Learned Additional Advocate General
submitted that there was a dispute with regard to the
measurement of the property of two persons, while Learned Senior
Counsel for the Petitioners submitted that all the parties were
dissatisfied with the measurements carried out by the survey team
of the concerned District. As sought for by the parties, two weeks'
time was afforded to enable them to examine the possibilities of a
settlement. Compliance Affidavit in terms of the Order of this
Court dated 17-08-2023 was filed by the State-Respondent No.1
on 05-09-2023. The compliance report inter alia detailed the spot
verification conducted on 24-08-2023. The joint inspection report,
dated 29-08-2023, was annexed thereto along with sketch map
showing the land holdings of the Petitioners.
5. On hearing the rival contentions of Learned Counsel for
the parties today and on perusal of the documents submitted
herein, it emanates that in Cont. Cas(C) No.03 of 2023, the
property recorded in the name of the Petitioner No.1 are plot
nos.290, 288 and 289. For the Petitioner No.2, the property
recorded in his name are plot nos.83, 95 and 125. For the
Petitioner No.3, the property recorded in his name are plot
nos.48/751, 903/955 and 904/956. The measurements of the
afore-detailed plots of land are reflected in the joint inspection
report dated 29-08-2023 and the sketch maps submitted by the
Respondent No.1.
(i) In Cont. Cas(C) No.04 of 2023, the property recorded
in the name of the Petitioner No.1 are plot nos.36 and 44. For the
Petitioner No.2, the property recorded in his name is plot no.
Cont. Cas(C) No.03 of 2023 : Man Kumar Basnett and Others vs. Tashi Chopel and Another 4 and Cont. Cas(C) No.04 of 2023 : Matrika Prasad Sharma and Others vs. Tashi Chopel and Another
64/768. For the Petitioner No.3, the property recorded in his
name are plot nos.47/844, 48/845 and 49/846. The
measurements of the afore-detailed plots of land are reflected in
the joint inspection report dated 29-08-2023 and the sketch maps
submitted by the Respondent No.1.
(ii) As per the submissions of the Learned Additional
Advocate General for Respondent No.1 and Learned Senior Counsel
for the Respondent No.2, it is found that the plot numbers and the
areas said to belong to all the Petitioners mentioned hereinabove
corresponds with the plot numbers and areas reflected in their
respective Parcha Khatiyans and there is no encroachment made
by the Respondent No.2 on their lands. Learned Senior Counsel for
the Petitioners disputes the said contention on grounds that the
Respondent No.2 while seeking to construct the road has entered
into their properties.
6. Admittedly all the Petitioners were present at the spot
on 24-08-2023 when the inspection was conducted by the
concerned authority in the presence of the Petitioners. The joint
inspection report was subsequently prepared on 29-08-2023 and
was signed by the Revenue Officials of the District Collectorate,
Pakyong District and the Deputy Director of the Land Revenue and
Disaster Management Department, Government of Sikkim.
7. Having considered the submissions put forth, the intent
and purpose of the Judgments in WP(C) No.25 of 2022 and WP(C)
No. 50 of 2022 and having perused all documents on record, it is
reiterated that the Judgments supra allows the infrastructural
project of expansion to be carried out by the Respondent No.2
provided they do not infringe on the rights of the plot numbers of
the Petitioners as reflected in their Parcha Khatiyans. As can be Cont. Cas(C) No.03 of 2023 : Man Kumar Basnett and Others vs. Tashi Chopel and Another 5 and Cont. Cas(C) No.04 of 2023 : Matrika Prasad Sharma and Others vs. Tashi Chopel and Another
culled out from their submissions and the documents, I am of the
considered opinion that for the present purposes, it cannot be said
that the Respondents have violated or wilfully disobeyed the
Judgments (supra) of this Court. The dispute between the parties
with regard to the encroachment as asserted by the Petitioners and
denied by the Respondent Nos.1 and 2, while relying an official
land records, cannot be addressed by this Court, in its contempt
jurisdiction.
8. Consequently, I am of the considered opinion that no
further discussions need ensue in the matter and the Petitions
deserve to be and are accordingly dismissed.
9. Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners draws the
attention of this Court to the Notice dated 07-06-2023 served on
all the Petitioners, except Petitioner No.1 in Cont. Cas(C) No.03 of
2023, by the District Collector, Pakyong District, inter alia requiring
them to vacate the areas on which they had constructed illegally
on Government land, within twenty days from the date of receipt of
the Notice and to collect the compensation amount so assessed for
their structures. That, twenty days so afforded by the Notice be
permitted to be availed by the Petitioners from tomorrow.
10. In view of the fact that the proceedings have continued
before this Court from 04-08-2023 till date, the twenty days
mentioned in the Notices supra shall be computed from tomorrow,
i.e., 13-10-2023.
11. Both Contempt Petitions stand disposed of accordingly.
( Meenakshi Madan Rai ) Judge 12-10-2023
ds/sdl
