MANTU KUMAR MAHTO Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to pay compensation to the petitioners for the houses and structures erected over the concerned land, as they are land losers under Bhairwa Reservoir Project in the district of Ramgarh after acquisition of their land way back in the year 1988-89.

(2.) The main submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that though the petitioners/their predecessors-in-interest have been paid compensation for acquisition of their respective land, but no payment of compensation has been made for the houses and structures, which were existing over the said land at the time of acquisition.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents, sworn by the Special land Acquisition Officer, Tenughat Project, Hazaribagh- respondent no.6, stating, inter alia, that the land of the petitioners along with others were acquired by the Government of Jharkhand for Bhairwa Reservoir Project in the district of Ramgarh in the year 1988-89 and 1989-90 and the awarded amount has already been paid to them. Subsequently, the petitioners along with other land losers whose houses were also acquired without payment of compensation approached the Executive Engineer, Waterways Division, Hazaribagh- respondent no.5 seeking compensation under Bhairwa Reservoir Project for their houses which were existing over their respective land, situated in the villages, namely, Sothai, Rundai, Nawadih and Bongasori under Ramgarh district on the basis of list of displaced persons. The respondent no.5 vide press release by way of paper publication as contained in letter no.269 dtd. 16/3/2015 issued a general notice for initiating process of payment for compensation of their houses situated in the said villages, inviting objections from the land losers as per the list prepared in the year 2005-06. Thereafter, notices were also issued to the petitioners along with other land losers with respect to payment of compensation for their houses to be made by the respondent no.6 in terms with valuation chart prepared by the respondent no.5. It has further been stated in the counter affidavit that no acquisition process was ever initiated by the respondent no.6 with respect to the houses of the land losers, however, the respondent no.5 prepared a valuation chart showing compensation amount with respect to the houses, which existed over the acquired land of the land losers.