SUJIT KUMAR DAS Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioner for directing the respondents to refer the L.A. Case No. 1/SN of 95 pending before the Collector, Land Acquisition (LA), West Tripura District, Agartala to the learned Land Acquisition (LA) Judge, West Tripura District, Agartala under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").

(2.) I have heard Mr. S. Talapatra, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. S. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the respondents.

(3.) The facts of the case as emerged from the pleadings of the petitioner are that he along with his brothers, namely, Ajit Kumar Das, Tarit Kumar Das and Subhas Chandra Das who were the joint owners of certain land appertaining to khatian No. 718/1, 718/2, 718/3, 718/4, 718/5, 718/6 having a total area of 21.51 acres situated within Bishalgarh mojua, West Tripura District and that a portion of the said land measuring 8.94 acres were acquired for construction of LPG Bottling plant by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited. Thereafter, for acquiring a portion of the said land i.e. 0.51 acre appertaining to CS plot Nos. 31/P, 32/P, 33/P,34/P for expansion of the said Project, a notice under Section 9 of the Act was issued on 15.5.1995. The petitioners, thereafter, filed 2 applications on 20.5.1995 for striking out the names of strangers, whose names appeared in the said notice and claimed the market value of the said land @ Rs. 10 lakh per kani, i.e. about 25 lakh per acre. The said applications are at Annexure-2. The petitioners also state that the LA Collector by his award dated 12.7.1995 awarded compensation of Rs. 1,01,898/- for the said land. It is the further case of the petitioners that on the basis of the judgment dated 15.9.1995 passed by the learned LA Judge in LA Case No. 1 of 95, the names of the said strangers were struck off on 4.7.1996 by modifying the above order and that on 4.7.1996, they received the said amount with objection. It is further stated by the petitioners that on 14.7.1996, they filed an application under Section 18 of the LA Act for referring the case to the learned LA Judge, West Tripura District, Agartala for enhancement of the compensation amount awarded to them by the LA Collector contending that the market value determined by the LA Collector was inadequate.