HUAPLIANA Vs. STATE OF MIZORAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. M. Zothankhuma, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. N. Sailo, learned Addl. Adv. General for the State respondents. None appears for and on behalf of the private respondent Nos. 4 to 9.

(2.) THIS writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the writ petitioners seeking cancellation of the Notification No. C. 18016/17/2001-REV dated 29. 7. 2005 and also the consequential Notification No. C. 13016/w-3/92-DISP/dte (REV) dated 5. 12. 2005 by which the Permit No. 156 of 1962 allotted to the petitioner No. 1 herein, covering an area of 6 bighas at Luangmual. (Annexure-2) was cancelled. By resorting to provision of Section 31 of the Lushai Hills District (House Site) Act, 1953, the Executive Department of Mizo District Council issued an order declaring all lands within the jurisdiction of Luangmual, Tanhril and Sawkawrtuichhun as protected area and accordingly decided that no allotment of land for the purpose of residence, trade or agriculture shall be made without previous sanction of the Executive Committee of the Mizoram District Council. In the year 1981 the petitioners having been granted Permit No. 156 of 1962, applied to the State Government for conversion of the said permit into a Periodic Patta, but their prayer was turned down by the Government on the ground that since their land fall under Aizawl Capital Town Expansion Project, such conversion was not possible due to prohibition imposed by the Government on any settlement operation including alteration, conversion and mutation etc. The writ petitioners also paid taxes regularly up to year 1990 in respect of land under the Permit No. 156 of 1962. Thereafter, the petitioners were unable to pay tax for the land under the permit since the appropriate authority did not accept the tax.

(3.) WHILE the Permit No. 156 of 1962 was continuing in the name of the writ petitioner No. 1, the State respondents after receipt of various applications from MLA, Ministers and others for settlement of land to them, issued six numbers of LSC to those applicants including one Zoramthanga, Sport Promotion Officer. The writ petitioners being aggrieved thereby approached this High Court, Aizawl Bench by filling a Civil Rule No. 94 of 1990. By an order, this court directed the Deputy Registrar of Gauhati High Court, Aizawl Bench to make a spot verification with information to the learned Adv. General and counsel of the petitioners to find out whether the land is still vacant. Pursuant to the order dated 7. 3. 1991, the Deputy Registrar, Gauhati High Court, Aizawl Bench conducted a spot verification of the disputed site and recorded issuance of land settlement certificates by the Director, Land Revenue and Settlement, Aizawl in favour of six persons and accordingly submitted a report (Annexure-10 ). In the report it is also mentioned that the remaining areas of the disputed site was offered to Gauhati High Court, Aizawl Bench under certificate of Land Lease No. DPL-3 of 1987. The report also confined that except two constructions, the remaining areas remained vacant without any construction. Thereafter, the Gauhati High Court, Aizawl Bench closed the Civil Rule No. 94 of 1990 on withdrawal with liberty to file afresh. In spite of putting restrictions by the Government vide order dated 17. 11. 1988 (Annexure-5) in respect of land settlement certificate operation, mutation, alteration, allotment of land for house site, garden etc. in the areas covered by Aizawl Town Expansion Project at Luangmual, Tanhril, Sawkawtruichhun and Bairabi areas, the Director, Land and Revenue settlement granted land settlement certificates to MLAs, Ministers and others pertaining to land covered by Permit No. 156 of 1962. It is contended further that such allotment of land under LSC to those people, of the land under Permit No. 156 of 1962 was made without cancelling the permit in the name of the petitioner No. 1. The cancellation order came into existence only on 29. 7. 2005 whereas the Government allotted house sites on 26. 9. 1990 much before the date of cancellation. The cancellation order dated 29. 7. 2005 also received approval from the Government communicated vide letter No. C. 18016/17/2001-REV dated 29. 7. 2005. The ground for cancellation as appended in the order (Annexure-22a) are as follows :