Maibam Tilotama Devi vs State Of Manipur

Heard Mr. Irom Denning, Ld. counsel for the petitioners and Mr.

Y. Ashang, Ld. GA who takes notice for all the respondents.

[2] Both the counsels are agreed for disposal of the writ petition at the admission stage itself.

[3] The case of the petitioners is that the State Government Authorities have decided to construct Heirok Branch Canal and Lousi Distributory Canal

for the Thoubal Multipurpose Project and for such construction, the lands are to be acquired by the State Government Authorities.

 [4] The petitioners are the owners and possessors of the property which they owned and possessed of the said lands which are included or affected

for such developmental project.

[5] While the State Government is acquiring the lands, they have fixed the amount for the affected lands belonging to Ingkhol at Rs.37.08 per sq. ft.,

but it is a case of the petitioners that they never negotiated with any officials of the State or their agencies and the owners have never agreed with

such rate for such acquisition of lands and the same has been done without their knowledge and concern.

[6] Therefore in the above circumstances, all the petitioners joint together had sent a representation on 09.01.2021 by requesting the respondents to

consider their request of the affected pattadars/land owners in the matter of land acquisition for the construction of Heirok Branch Canal and Lousi

Distributory Canal for the Thoubal Multipurpose Project for enhancements of the rate for such acquisition of the lands of the affected pattadars/land

owners by taking into consideration that for acquisition by way of direct purchase of lands for the purpose of widening of the NH-102/AH-1 at

Khongjom were acquired at the rate of Rs.615 per sq. ft.

[7] Though the representation was given on 09.01.2021, but while considering the same which is pending for consideration, the respondents and its

agencies are entering into the premises of the petitioners and disturbing the peaceful possessions of the land of the petitioners.

[8] In the above circumstances, the petitioners approached this Court and filed the present writ petition seeking the prayers as follows:-

I. to direct the respondents to consider representation dated 09/01/2021 addressed to the Commissioner, Water Resources Department, Government

of Manipur and the Deputy Commissioner, Thoubal District, Manipur by issuing a speaking order;

II. in the meantime, the Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct the respondents not to disturb the physical possession of the present petitioners during

such consideration of the representation;

AND

III. to pass any appropriate order(s) or direction(s) which the Hon’ble Court may deem fit, proper and just in the nature of the present case.

[9] I heard Mr. Irom Denning, Ld. counsel for the petitioners and

Mr. Y. Ashang, Ld. GA for the respondents and perused the documents.

[10] Both the counsels admitted that these petitioners’ lands and other lands are acquired for the purpose of construction of Heirok Branch Canal

and Lousi Distributory Canal for the Thoubal Multipurpose Project.

[11] There is no document to show by the petitioners that what are all the documents that the respondents have fixed the rate per st. ft. for

acquirement of the lands. But they orally represented before this Court that the respondent authorities have fixed the rate at Rs.37.08 per sq. ft. only,

but they have given the representation on 09.01.2021 only for enhancing the amount. After given the representation on 09.01.2021, they filed the

present writ petition before this Court seeking the prayers as mentioned above.

[12] The further case of the petitioners is that in other places, the respondents are paid more amount whereas for the petitioners’ lands, they have

fixed very less amount. Therefore, they prayed this Court to consider their prayer sought for in this writ petition.

[13] On the other hand, Mr. Y. Ashang, Ld. GA represented that though the representation was given on 09.01.2021 and the same is pending before

the respondents, if this Court is inclined to pass appropriate direction to the respondents to pass orders on the representation of the petitioners within a

stipulated period of time, the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are ready to consider and pass orders and Mr. Irom Denning, Ld. counsel for the petitioners

also agreed for the same, but he prayed this Court that till consideration of the petitioners’ representation dated 09.01.2021, the respondents should

not disturb the possession of the petitioners.

[14] Considering both sides’ arguments and without going into the merits and demerits of the case of the petitioners, I am inclined to pass the

following orders:-

a) the writ petition is disposed of;

b) the respondent Nos.2 and 3 are hereby directed to consider the petitioners’ representation dated 09.01.2021 by giving personal opportunity to

the petitioners and to pass appropriate speaking order;

c) the said exercise shall be done within a period of 4(four) weeks from the date of this order;

d) till such consideration, the respondents are directed not to disturb the possession of the petitioners.

[15] With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

[16] Registry is directed to issue copy of this order to both the parties through their whatsapp/e-mail.