BISHU DEBBARMA Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. R. Paul, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. H. Sarkar, learned counsel who has entered in the appearance for the respondents.

(2.) By means of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the decision contained in the letter under No.F.DM/W/LA/Extension/05/08/9266-72 dtd. 29/12/2010 issued by the District Magistrate and Collector, West Tripura, Agartala addressed to the Secretary, Government of Tripura, Revenue Department. Further, the petitioner has urged for a direction upon the respondents to make the compensation for rubber trees @Rs.7,143.00 per tree in terms of the memorandum under No.F.6-487/DEV/TRPC-2010/3902-09 dtd. 5/10/2010 issued by the Tripura Rehabilitation Plantation Corporation Ltd. It has been urged by the petitioner that the respondents be directed to refer the said acquisition case to the Land Acquisition Judge in terms of Sec. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [the L.A. Act in short].

(3.) This court is confronted with the case where the land allotted to the petitioner, who claimed to represents the societies were acquired for purpose of extension of NF Railway line from Agartala to Sabroom under Bishalgarh Sub-Division. The petitioner, as stated, claims to represent a society, namely Karaiyamura-I Rubber Producers Society [the RPS in short] which were raised 86 hectares of rubber plantation in the year 1985 [as claimed]. The Society has received financial assistance from the Rubber Board for the said plantation. While for extension of the said railway line, the land measuring 50.68 acres was acquired, the petitioner's society received the notice as the interested person for purpose of determining the award. There is no dispute that that the award to the extent of Rs.2,25,592.00 was accepted by the said society which is purportedly represented by the petitioner. As the society was not fully satisfied with the said award by a petition dtd. 5/3/2010 [Annexure-2A to the writ petition], it had asked for reference under Sec. 18 of the L.A. Act. Thereafter, a meeting was convened by the DM and Collector to look into the grievance afresh and from the letter dtd. 29/12/2010 [Annexure-5 to the writ petition] it appears that the meeting was held on 20/12/2010 at 12.00 noon at the SDM's Office, Bishalgarh in presence of the public representatives, the officials of NF Railways, President of RPS Unit-I and II, Karaiyamura (Amtali) for discussion regarding detailed survey work at Bishalgarh and payment of compensation for mature rubber trees to RPS Unit-I and II, Karaiyamura (Amtali) etc. Minutes of the meeting was prepared. After the discussion it was decided in presence of the public representatives that the amount of compensation will be enhanced from Rs.163.00 to Rs.800.00 per mature rubber tree and accordingly, the compensation was paid to the RPS-I and II, Karaiyamura, if they had withdrawn their petition submitted under Sec. 18 of the L.A. Act for reference. There is no dispute that the representatives of the petitioner's society were present there. Later on, the society had accepted the enhanced amount without raising any protest as required under proviso to Sec. 31(2) of the L.A Act which provides as under: