Salil Toppo vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors

The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to pay suitable compensation to the petitioner for the land

situated at Village- Chano II, Thana No. 149, Khata No. 15, Plot No. 1302/1 measuring an area of 2.15 acres, which has been acquired by the State

Government for the purpose of construction and widening of National Highway 33. The petitioner has also prayed for grant of statutory interest on the

amount of compensation to be paid to him for acquisition of the said land.

The case of the petitioner is that the aforesaid land was purchased by late Rafel Toppo, the father of the petitioner by virtue of registered sale

deeds dated 17.01.1948 and 13.04.1948. After purchase of the said land, the same got mutated in the office of the respondent no. 7 â€" the Circle

Officer, Sadar, Hazaribagh vide Mutation Case No. 7/1958-59. Thereafter, the rent was regularly paid and in lieu thereof the rent receipts were also

issued with respect to the said land. In the year 2011, the State Government intended to acquire land for the purpose of construction and widening of

National Highway 33 in which the aforesaid land of the petitioner being part of Plot No. 1302/1 under Khata No. 15 of Village-Chano-II was also

acquired, however, no compensation was paid to the petitioner. On enquiry, the petitioner came to know that he was required to submit “Raiyati

Manyata†certificate with respect to the said land. Thereafter, on 17.06.2011, the petitioner made an application before the respondent no. 7 for

issuance of “Raiyati Manyata†certificate. On receipt of the said application, the respondent no. 7 initiated a proceeding being Case No. 03/2011-

12 and on 20.08.2011, a general notice was issued informing and inviting objection (if any) from all concerned about seeking of “Raiyati Manyataâ€

by the petitioner and his brother Amulya Toppo in relation to the said land. The report in this regard was also submitted by the Halka Karmchari/Circle

Inspector recommending grant of “Raiyati Manyata†in favour of the petitioner and his brother Amulya Toppo. Thereafter, the respondent no. 7

passed order dated 30.08.2011 (Annexure-3 to the writ petition) in the said case and made recommendation to the respondent no. 5 â€" the Land

Reforms Deputy Collector, Hazaribagh for grant of “Raiyati Manyata†of the said land in favour of the petitioner and his brother Amulya Toppo.

On 16/17.09.2011, the respondent no. 5 â€" the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Hazaribagh and the respondent no. 6 â€" the Sub-Divisional Officer,

Hazaribagh jointly recommended for grant of “Raiyati Manyata†of the said land in favour of the petitioner and his brother Amulya Toppo.

Subsequently, the respondent no. 3 â€" the Additional Collector, Hazaribagh vide letter no. 14 dated 03.01.2012 demanded the certified copy of the

registered sale deeds dated 17.01.1948 and 13.04.1948. Thereafter, the respondent no. 7 again made recommendation to the respondent no. 3 for

grant of “Raiyati Manyata†vide order dated 17.04.2012 by sending the required certified copies of registered sale deeds. The respondent no. 3

vide letter no. 819 dated 22.05.2013 issued to the respondent no. 7 though mentioned that the land in question was obtained by the petitioner’s

father by virtue of registered sale deeds in the year 1948, but it was not clear as to how a gair mazarua land was obtained prior to the said year, yet

there being a jamabandi in favour of the petitioner’s father since 1953-54, a proposal for payment of compensation on the basis of the said

possession was ordered to be prepared in favour of the concerned raiyat and the Government. Thereafter, a separate record was opened being

Raiyati Manyata Record No. 01/2014-15 in the office of the respondent no. 3 after lapse of about two years and letter no. 1112 dated 13.04.2015 was

issued by the respondent no. 3 to the respondent no. 7 to correct certain defects in this regard. On receipt of the said letter, subsisting defects were

rectified by the respondent no. 7 and recommendation was forwarded to the respondent no. 6. It was further found by the respondent no. 6 that there

was some more defects subsisting and thereby directed the respondent no. 7 vide letter no. 386 dated 11.05.2016 to rectify the said defects.

Thereafter, the respondent no. 7 rectified the said defects and again forwarded the matter to the respondent no. 6 for further action vide his letter no.

1092 dated 26.06.2018. In view of the aforesaid background, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter regarding payment of

compensation to the petitioner in lieu of acquisition of the aforesaid land has been pending before the authorities for about a decade and the petitioner

is compelled to run from pillar to post for his legitimate claim of compensation.

Learned AC to AG submits that since the “Raiyati Manyata†certificate was needed in relation to the aforesaid land, the authorities were

bound to verify all the relevant facts relating to the said land and the said exercise appears to have consumed some time. However, the authorities will

take appropriate steps for expediting the present matter and for taking appropriate decision in this regard.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the content of the writ petition. On perusal of the statements made in the present writ petition

as well as the documents annexed therewith, it appears that the authorities have consumed much time in taking decision with regard to the grant of

“Raiyati Manyataâ€​ in favour of the petitioner and his brother Amulya Toppo so as to enable them to claim compensation for acquisition of the land

in question.

Hence, all the concerned respondents are directed to expedite the matter and to take a suitable decision with regard to grant of “Raiyati

Manyata†certificate in favour of the petitioner and his brother Amulay Toppo in relation to the aforesaid land within a period of 12 weeks from the

date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. If the petitioner and his brother is granted the “Raiyati Manyata†certificate for the land in

question, the respondent no. 4 â€" the Land Acquisition Officer, Hazaribagh shall take further decision with regard to the claim of compensation for

the said land within 12 weeks thereafter.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with aforesaid observation and direction.