PACHHUNGA Vs. STATE OF MIZORAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner Sh. Pachhunga, claiming entitled to all remedies under the Constitution of India being a Citizen of the Union, has presented this Peti- tion for a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate. Writ/Order/Direction of the like nature commanding the respondents to make payment of compensation which has been already assessed in his favour along with any other relief that the Court may think fit and proper.

(2.) The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that within the area of Republic Veng, Aizawl, he was, along with others, allotted land but due to construction of a playground in 1985 there was landslide and his residential house standing thereupon became insecure for which he had to vacate the same. But in spite of representation Govt. took no action to compensate the victim who was affected. Excepting Saizahawla no other victims were paid compensation. State Sports Council and Director, Sports and Youth Services, Government of Mizoram acting on behalf of the State of Mizoram were responsible to act. Four persons were affected in this case. Three of them, namely, - Sh. Hranga, Sh. Saizahawla and Manthanga, were either granted compensation or allotted house in exchange but the petitioner was only allowed Rs. 80,000.00 as compensation due to inadequacy of the same several representations were made and finally, there was spot verification and assessment of the compensation by duly authorised persons and amount was fixed at Rs. 4,78,407.00. The petitioner could apprehend that there was no intention to make payment. Several representation brought him no response from the Govt.

(3.) The Government of Mizoram presented affidavit-in-opposition through Under Secretary, Sports and Youth Services, acting for and on behalf of all the respondents. The respondents contended that the petitioner along with others were granted compensations on humanitarian ground and Sh. Saizahawla was given alternative building in exchange of damage to his property. The construction of the Republic Veng playground in the year 1985 by Mizoram Sports Council was admitted but it was submitted that in between the house of the petitioner and the playground, there was a P.W.D. road and accordingly, the damage, if any, to the house of the petitioner was not due to the construction of the playground but was due to natural phenomenon for which the respondents cannot be held responsible. 125 It was, however, conceded that even if the petitioner was entitled to any compensation, it was the liabilities of Mizoram Sports Council and not the other respondents.