SHRI C. WUNGAM @ WUNGREINGAM Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution filed by the Chief of a village on his behalf and on behalf of his villagers seeking for a direction or order of this Court directing the respondents to initiate land acquisition proceeding in respect of their land occupied by Assam Rifle and also to pay compensation for the same. This case is a revelation of the story of poor and helpless tribals of a hill village whose land has been taken away for the purpose of accommodating Assam Rifles who have come to the State for helping the State Government in maintaining law & order, but not yet given their rightful compensation for the land which they were made to part with. Heard Ms. Bisheshwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. Rupachandra, learned ASG, for the respondents No. 1 to 3. As for the respondents No. 4 and 5, none appears on their behalf today.

(2.) The facts of the case briefly stated are as follows : The petitioner is the Chief of the village namely Khoirupok Village in Ukhrul District, Manipur which nomenclature has now been changed to Lungtoram Village vide Government of Manipur order No. 9/13/2005 -CHA dated 27.09.2005. The petitioner and his villagers have continued to live in the village since the time of their forefathers. The fact that, they have been living in the village is supported by the Hill House Tax Receipts of the year 1941, 1976 and 2008, copy of which are filed in the writ petition. In the month of March, 2004 personnel of 34th Assam Rifles came to the village and started occupying a portion of the village including their playground altogether measuring about 12 (twelve) acres without the land being acquired as per law of the land. Since then, the Assam Rifles have continued to occupy the land of the villagers. The petitioner and his villagers submitted a series of representations to the respondents asking for compensation. But the respondents did not pay their compensation. Therefore, through their learned counsel, the petitioner sent a legal notice dated 27.11.2008 to all the respondents. Since no tangible action has been taken towards payment of compensation, and the petitioner and his villagers having no choice, has come to this High Court praying for a direction to the respondents to initiate land acquisition proceeding under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and pay the compensation to them for their land taken away by the Assam Rifles.

(3.) Counter affidavits were filed by all the respondents. In their joint counter affidavit respondents No. 1 to 3 did not deny the fact that the Assam Rifles have been in occupation of the land of the villagers, but objected the claim of the petitioner and his villagers for compensation on the ground that the Assam Rifles occupied the land only after a no objection certificate was issued by the village council of the petitioners' village, therefore the petitioner and his villagers cannot now claim compensation. Secondly, they also submitted that ownership of the land claimed by the petitioner and his villagers is not establish by mere payment of hill house tax, in the absence of any other document, therefore, their entitlement for compensation for the land is doubtful. The main point of objection raised by them is that since the Assam Rifles came on the request of the State Government, it is the responsibility of the State Government to pay the compensation. Respondents No. 4 and 5 who represented the State Government unlike the respondents No. 1 to 3 did not raise any question on the ownership over the land occupied by the Assam Rifles. The only issue raised by them is that no prior information was given by the Assam Rifles before the land was occupied by them, as such, the State Government is not responsible for paying the compensation.