Yogesh Kumar Mahato vs State Of Jharkhand And Others

Rajesh Shankar, J

The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the concerned respondents to pay the balance amount of compensation in terms with the award prepared in connection with Land Acquisition Case no.10 of 2015-16 to the petitioner/his mother, as his ancestral property pertaining to plot no.779, Khata no.6, measuring an area of 05 decimals was acquired by the State Government for widening of “Shravan Path”.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the process of widening of the aforesaid road, various land of concerned Mouja were acquired in which the petitioner’s land measuring an area of 05 decimals consisting of a house was also acquired. Accordingly, an award was prepared in connection with Land Acquisition Case no.10 of 2015-16 in the name of the petitioner’s father- Nirpat Mahto (since deceased), fixing the amount of compensation as Rs.7,35,449.78. Subsequent to preparation of the award, the petitioner’s father died on 28th November, 2019, however, an amount of Rs.3,94,727/- only had been paid to him during his lifetime and the balance amount as per the said award was not paid. Aggrieved with the said situation, the petitioner’s mother- Dharni Mahto represented the District Land Acquisition Officer, Giridih- respondent no.3 on 27th January, 2020, claiming the balance amount of compensation in terms with the aforesaid award. She also swore an affidavit before the Notary Public, Giridih, stating that she was the legally wedded wife of Late Nirpat Mahto and since her husband had died on 28th November, 2019, she was competent to receive the balance amount of compensation. However, no further action was taken by the respondent no.3 in this regard, which has compelled the petitioner, espousing the cause of his mother, to file the present writ petition.

Mr. Aditya Kumar, learned A.C. to Sr. S.C.I, appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the aforesaid claim of the petitioner is required to be factually examined by the respondent no.3 and, therefore, if the petitioner/his mother files a fresh representation before the respondent no.3 in this regard, an appropriate decision will be taken within a timeframe.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of the prayer made in the writ petition, without entering into merit of the case, the petitioner/his mother is given liberty to prefer a fresh representation before the respondent no.3, claiming balance amount of compensation as per the award prepared in connection with Land Acquisition Case no.10 of 2015-16. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent no.3 on verifying the relevant records and on providing due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner/his mother or their representative shall take an appropriate informed decision within four weeks from the date of filing of the representation.

If the respondent no.3 finds that balance amount as fixed vide aforesaid award has not been paid and there is no such legal impediment, the same shall be released in favour of the petitioner’s mother on her due identification within two weeks thereafter.

The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty and direction.