AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Mr. A. Das, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners and Ms. S. Baruah, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.1. I have also heard Ms. K. Phukan, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.3; Mr. H. Sharma, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 4 & 5 and Mr. N. N. Jha, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.6.
The Petitioners herein have approached this Court seeking appropriate directions upon the Respondent No.3 for acquisition the land of the Petitioners admeasuring 1 Bigha 10 Lechas covered by Dag No.9, Patta No.116 of village Nagaon under Kamalpur Revenue Circle in the District of Kamrup (R) and pay the compensation.
The brief facts on which the instant writ petition has been premised is that the Petitioners are the owners of a plot of land admeasuring 1 Bigha 10 Lechas covered by Dag No.9, Patta No.116 of village Nagaon under Kamalpur Revenue Circle in the District of Kamrup (R). It is the case of the Petitioners that the said land was earlier mutated in the name of their father, Late Muniram Saloi @ Muniram Kakoty. The Petitioners thereupon alleges that the said land was illegally mutated in the name of one Smt. Salini Bhagat i.e. the Respondent No.6 vide an order dated 05.01.2015 passed in Mutation Case No.1460/2014-15 by committing fraud.
Subsequent thereto, the Petitioners filed a complaint before the Circle Officer, Kamalpur Revenue Circle and the said mutation was cancelled vide an order dated 03.03.2016 and the land was jointly mutated in the names of the Petitioners vide an order dated 08.06.2016. It is the further case of the Petitioners that the Respondent No.3 had constructed the Kamalpur Power Project over the land and no compensation in that regard had been paid. The Petitioners had represented before various authorities and the Petitioners having not received any favorable response, the present petition has been filed.
This Court duly takes note of that pursuant to the filing of the instant writ petition, notice was issued by the learned Coordinate Bench of this Court vide the order dated 17.03.2021. Pursuant thereto, the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have filed an affidavit-in-opposition wherein it is categorically mentioned that in the year 2013, the Assam Electricity Grid Corporation Limited, i.e. the Respondent No.3 purchased a plot of land admeasuring 5 Bighas 3 Kathas 5 Lechas comprised in Dag No.9 of K.P. Patta No.116 and land admeasuring 9 Bighas 1 Katha 15 Lechas included in Dag No.171 of K.P. Patta No.221 in total, an area of 15 Bighas which is contained in K.P. Patta Nos. 116 and 221 of Dag No. 9 and Dag No.171 respectively of Revenue Village Nagaon under Mouza Karara, P.O. Karara, in the district of Kamrup (R), Assam. The land had also been mutated in the name of the Respondent No.3. The Sale Deed was enclosed as Annexure-1 to the said affidavit-in-opposition.
It is the further case of the Respondent No.3 in the said affidavit-in-opposition that upon the said land, the Respondent No.3 had constructed 132 KV Grid Sub-Station located in the load centre between Amingaon and Baihata Chariali for public interest. In addition to that, the Respondent No.3 has also enclosed a communication dated 02.01.2017 wherein it is mentioned that as per the report of the Lat Mondal and Sadar Kanungo, it appears that the names of the Petitioners were mutated in Dag No.9 of K.P. Patta No.116 under Mouza Karara, Village Nagaon. Further to that, Shri Sandip Kumar Bhagat purchased 14 Bighas 1 Katha 5 Lechas of land from Co-pattadars i.e. Atuwar Rahman Saikia, Tazul Islam Saikia, Raju Saikia, Safiajan Saikia from Dag No.9 of K.P. Patta No.116. In addition to that, the Shri Sandip Kumar Bhagat had also purchased 3 Bighas 2 Kathas 1 Lecha from Shri Debendra Nath Saloi and 4 Bighas 4 Kathas from Ayub Ali. In total, 22 Bighas 2 Kathas 15 Lechas stood in the name of Shri Sandip Kumar Bhagat. On 16.08.2014, 5 Bighas 3 Kathas 5 Lechas covered by Dag No.9, K.P. Patta No.116 got mutated in the name of AEGCL from Shri Sandip Kumar Bhagat. It was also mentioned that Shri Sandip Kumar Bhagat and Shri Salini Bhagat had not purchased any land from Shri Biren Saloi and Shri Damborudhar Kakati. The Respondent No. 3 had purchased total land admeasuring 15 Bighas from Shri Sandip Kumar Bhagat.
The Respondent No.6 has also filed an affidavit-in-opposition wherein it is mentioned that she had purchased 1 Bigha 10 Lechas of land covered by Dag No.9 of K.P. Patta No.116 situated at Revenue Village Nagaon, under Mouza Karara in the District of Kamrup vide the registered Sale Deed bearing No.336 dated 01.03.2014 (registered on 06.03.2014) from her vendors, Shri Biswajit Kakati and Shri Amba Kakati and since then, the Respondent No.6 is in exclusive actual physical possession of the said land. The said Deed was also enclosed to the said affidavit-in-opposition.
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners submitted that these sales which have taken place by which the Respondent No.3 had purchased 15 Bighas of land as well as the sale by which the Respondent No.6 had purchased 1 Bighas 10 Lechas of land are all fraudulent Deeds of Sale and as such, the Petitioners are entitled to the compensation.
This Court has duly given an anxious consideration to the respective submissions and has also perused the materials on record.
From the perusal of the materials on record, it is seen that vide a Deed of Sale, the Respondent No.3 had purchased 5 Bighas 3 Kathas 5 Lechas of land covered by Dag No.9 of K.P. Patta No.116 and 9 Bighas 1 Katha 15 Lechas covered by Dag No.171 of K.P. Patta No.221 from one Shri Sandip Kumar Bhagat. The said Sale Deed still holds the field.
It is the specific case of the Respondent No.3 that upon the said land admeasuring 15 Bighas, the Respondent No.3 had constructed the 132 KV Grid Sub-Station. In addition to that, this Court also takes note of the Deed of Sale dated 01.03.2014, executed by Shri Biswajit Kakati and Shri Amba Kakati in favour of the Respondent No.6. The said Deed of Sale unless cancelled in accordance with law, the Respondent No.6 has title over the said land.
Considering the above, this Court cannot direct the Respondent Authorities to acquire the land of the Petitioners inasmuch as the Respondent No.3 had purchased the land vide a Deed of Sale dated 11.12.2013 and thereupon had constructed the 132 KV Grid Sub-Station.
Accordingly, this Court does not find any merit in the instant writ petition, for which the writ petition stands dismissed.
Before parting with the record, it is observed that the dismissal of the writ petition shall not preclude the Petitioners to approach the competent Court of Civil Jurisdiction, if so advised, challenging the Sale Deeds.