AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Mr. B. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. N. Mozika, learned counsel for the respondents No. 5 &
6/MeECL and Mrs. S. Bhattacharjee, learned GA for the State respondents No. 1-4.
The brief fact of the petitioner''s case in a nutshell is that:
The petitioner is the owner of a plot of land measuring about 20 acres, situated within Shillong (Lower Mawprem), Mylliem
Syiemship, East Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya which devolved on her by virtue of succession and inheritance as per the prevailing
Khasi customary practice. During the life time of the predecessor in interest of the petitioner a written agreement was executed dated
21st August, 1920 between the predecessor in interest of the petitioner as the first party and the respondent No. 7 as the second
party with the power to sub lease the said plot of land by the respondent No. 7 to the office of the respondents No. 5 and 6 that was
proposed to be formed with the object of lighting the town of Shillong. The terms of the said agreement inter alia stipulated that the
respondent No. 7 would pay an annual rent of Rs. 100 (Rupees one hundred only) annually to the petitioner and in case the land
leased is not required or is abandoned, it shall revert to the first party and he may re-enter and take possession thereof. In violation of
the said 2(two) agreements by the aforesaid respondents the petitioner issued a Pleader notice upon the said respondents to hand
over possession of the said plot of land. Thereafter, due to the inaction of the respondents to hand over possession of the said plot of
land the petitioner instituted a Title Suit No. 5 (T) of 2004 in the Court of the Assistant to Deputy Commissioner, Shillong against the
respondents for declaration, eviction, recovery of possession and permanent injunction. The respondents No. 5, 6 and 7 entered
appearance but did not contest the suit and accordingly the matter proceeded ex parte and vide Judgment and Order dated 25-02-
2005, the Court of the Assistant to Deputy Commissioner, Shillong decided in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents
and decree dated 25-03-2005 was drawn up accordingly. After the decree being drawn up in the matter, the petitioner filed an
application for execution of the said decree which was registered as Title Execution No. 5 (T) of 2005 and accordingly the Court
issued warrant of attachment against the respondents No. 5 and 6. The bailiff acting upon the Court''s order accordingly executed the
Court''s order by handing over the vacant possession of the said plot of land to the petitioner on the 13th April, 2007. However, on
the same day i.e. on the 13th April, 2007 the day the bailiff of the Court executed the Court''s order in handing over vacant
possession to the petitioner the respondents No. 5 and 6 without the knowledge of the petitioner obtained a stay order and
dispossessed the petitioner of her rightful property in connivance with the Additional District Magistrate. Aggrieved by the wrongful
dispossession from her property by the respondents No. 5 and 6, the petitioner lodged an F.I.R before the Police. However, the
police refused to investigate the matter on flimsy ground citing section 157(a)(b) Cr.P.C. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a Revision
Petition before the Court of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Shillong against the stay order dated 13.04.2007 in Title Execution
Case No. 5 (T) of 2005 and the same was registered as Civil Revision Petition No. 7 (T) of 2007. During the pendency of the said
Civil Revision Petition the respondents No. 5 and 6 preferred an appeal before the Court of the Additional Deputy commissioner,
Shillong against the Judgment and Order dated 25-2-2005 passed in Title Suit No. 5 (T) of 2004 by the Court of the Assistant to
Deputy Commissioner, Shillong and the same was registered as T.C.A No. 2 (T) of 2007. The said appeal was presented along with
a petition for condonation of delay. The learned Appellate Court after hearing the matter dismissed the said appeal on 21.04.2008.
Against the order of dismissal of the appeal, the respondents No. 5 and 6 did not agitate the matter before any other higher authority
and the Judgment and Order and Decree passed in Title Suit No. 5 (T) of 2004 became final. Thereafter, vide Judgment and Order
dated 26.05.2010 the said Civil Revision Petition No. 7 (T) of 2007 was disposed of with the observation that the subsequent
dispossession of the Decree Holder gave rise to a separate cause of action which have been ensued to the Decree Holder once he
was put in possession by the authority of law that is, the Bailiff of the court and that the petitioner may seek redressal of the
grievances before the proper Court for the purpose and not a Court of Revision. The respondents No. 5 and 6 thereafter in order to
resolve the dispute pertaining to the said plot of land has on many occasions communicated to the petitioner officially through their
official letters. Finally, the respondent No. 2 issued a notification under section 4 followed by a declaration under section 6 of the
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to acquire the said plot of land. The said declaration was followed with the issuance of notice under
section 9(3) and (4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 by the respondent No. 3. After the issuance of notice under section 9(3) and
(4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 by the respondent No. 3 the respondent No. 3 has not initiated further proceedings under
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the same has lapsed. The said plot of land belonging to the petitioner has been in illegal
occupation/possession of the respondents No. 5 and 6 since many years. The petitioner''s plea to the respondents No. 3, 5 and 6 on
many occasions for proper acquisition of her land and grant of compensation for the plot of land illegally and arbitrarily
occupied/possessed by the respondents No. 5 and 6 has fell on deaf ears. Hence this writ petition for redressal of her grievances.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the respondents No. 5 & 6/MeECL has already taken a resolution and forwarded a
letter to the Deputy Commissioner, East Khasi Hills District, Shillong as reflected in Annexure-2 of the counter affidavit filed by the MeECL, the
matter can be disposed of with necessary directions, to which the learned counsel for the respondents No. 5 & 6/MeECL has no objection.
I have perused the resolution as well as the Annexure-2 of the counter affidavit filed by the MeECL. The said Annexure-2 is reproduced herein
below for ready reference:
MEGHALAYA ENERGY CORPORATION LIMITED
Corporate Affairs
Corporate Identification No. U40101ML2009SGC008374
LUM JINGSHAI, SHORT ROUND ROAD, SHILLONG 793001,
MEGHALAYA
Fax: 0364-2590355 : Website address : www.meecl.nic.in
No. MeECL/LCCA/HC/139/2017/3
6th Sept, 2017.
To,
The Deputy Commissioner,
East Khasi Hills District,
Shillong, Meghalaya.
Sub:- Acquisition of Land at Lower Mamprem for Sonapani Mini Hydel Project (1 x 1500 KW).
Ref:- 1. Letter No. L.14/5(20)2008/113, dated 18th November, 2014.
Letter No. RDA.38/2008/70, dated 28th January, 2015.
Letter No. 14/5(20)2008/119, dated 4th March, 2015.
Sir,
With reference to the subject cited above, I am directed to inform you that the Board of Director, MeECL in its meeting held on 7th
July 2017, has accorded its approval for the acquisition of land measuring about 4.71 acres situated at Lower Mamprem for
Sonapani Mini Hydel Project (1 x 1500 KW) as per the new Act since the land acquisition proceeding initiated under the old Act has
lapse.
In view of the above, I am directed to request you kindly to initiate the process of Acquisition of the aforesaid land in accordance
with the new Act.
An early reply in this regard is solicited.
Enclosed:- As above.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(D. Warjri)
Joint Secretary,
MeECL, Shillong.
After hearing the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered view that this matter can be disposed of at
this stage with following order:
The Deputy Commissioner, East Khasi Hills District, Shillong is directed to initiate the process of Acquisition in accordance with the new Act i.e.
The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and to dispose of the matter
within 6(six) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and order.
With this observation and direction the writ petition is allowed and stands disposed of.