SH HRANGDAWLA Vs. STATE OF MIZORAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A. R. Malhotra, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. N. Sailo, learned Addl. A.G. assisted by Mrs. Helen Dawngliani, learned A.G.A. appearing for the respondents 1-3 and 5 to 7.

(2.) The petitioner purchased a plot of land located at Hmarveng Kolasib from one Sh. Kapzawna in the year 1992. After purchase of the land the petitioner constructed small house thereon and started living with his family members consisting of 4 children and the wife. The petitioner, after purchase of the land applied for a revenue pass from the appropriate authority completing with all the formalities required for the purpose and accordingly a House Pass No. K.396/2001 was issued in favour of the petitioner for the said plot of land. The house constructed was subsequently demolished and in place of the same an Assam Type house was constructed by the petitioner spending Rs. 50,000/-. But the said Assam type house was forcibly dismantled by the respondent No. 4 on 22.7.04 without permission from the petitioner for construction of a road starting from North Kolasib to Sairang and the land so belonged to him also was taken over forcibly by the respondent No. 4 for the public purpose. It would be appropriate to state at this stage that the revenue authority issued Land Settlement Certificate No. 501701/01/834 of 2005 in favour of the writ petitioner covering an area of 224.87 Sq.m. and accordingly by virtue of this Land Settlement Certificate the petitioner became the owner and possessor of the building and the land. After demolition of his building so constructed by him and forcible taking of the land, the petitioner approached the appropriate authority for compensation. Since the respondents rendered the petitioner and his family homeless, it is further contended that the demolition and forcible taking over the land is an infringement of the fundamental right of the writ petitioner guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 & 21 of the Constitution. Forcible taking over the land and demolition of the house constructed by him without adhering to the procedure established by law as provided in the Land Acquisition Act is illegal. The petitioner, therefore, filed this writ petition under Article 300 A of the Constitution for payment of compensation towards demolition of the building and forcibly occupation of the land belonged to him. The petitioner further prays this court to issue direction to the appropriate authority to award compensation and damages for such acquisition of the land and demolition of the house.

(3.) Mr.N. Sailo, learned Addl. A. G. during the course of his argument submitted that the land of the petitioner was never taken forcibly by the Government nor the building had been damaged rather it was the respondent No. 4, the Village Council, Kolasib who had taken over the land forcibly from the petitioner and demolished the house belonging to him. So the respondents No. 1-3 cannot be directed to make compensation etc. for acquisition of the land and demolition of the house for the purpose of construction of road.