Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010256502023 2025:GAU-AS:2300 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6655/2023 DIMBA SAIKIA S/O- BHOLA SAIKIA, R/O- BARANGABARI, P.O. BARANGABARI, PIN- 784172, P.S. GOHPUR, DIST. BISWANATH, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, ASSAM SECRETARIAT (CIVIL), DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6, ASSAM 2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BISWANATH DIST. BISWANATH ASSAM PIN- 784176. 3:THE ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (REVENUE) BISWANATH DIST. BISWANATH ASSAM PIN- 784176. 4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER HELEM REVENUE CIRCLE P.O. HELEM DIST. BISWANATH ASSAM PIN- 784170. 5:LAKHESWAR SAIKIA Page No.# 2/4 S/O- BHOLA SAIKIA R/O- BARANGABARI P.O. BARANGABARI PIN- 784172 P.S. GOHPUR DIST. BISWANATH ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P BORDOLOI, MS M NIROLA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, MR. I H LASKAR (R-5),MR. P K DEKA (R-5),MR. P DAIMARY (R-5),MR. R. KARIM (R-5),SC, REVENUE BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 05-03-2025 1. Heard Mr. P Bordoloi, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The petitioner claims to be a co-pattadar of a plot of land measuring 0.040 hectare under Dag No. 579 of Periodic Patta No. 8 of Hukajan Gaon, Brahmajan Mouza under Helem Revenue Circle in the district of Biswanath Chariali. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that though compensation has been assessed, however, same is sanctioned only in the name of respondent No. 5, who is the brother of the petitioner and thus the petitioner has been deprived of his legitimate share of land acquisition compensation. 4. Mr. H Sarma, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate relying on the statements made at paragraph 6 in the affidavit in opposition filed by the District Commissioner, Biswanath submits that the subject matter of compensation are for two numbers Page No.# 3/4 of houses left out in assessment during the acquisition and accordingly, re-assessment was done and additional estimate for third phase has been prepared and accordingly compensation of total amount of Rs.29,44,252 for two left out houses had been sanctioned in the name of respondent No.5 by the competent authority and accordingly the NHIDCL has deposited the aforesaid amount with the CALA. Accordingly, by referring to the provision of section 3H(3), Mr. Sarma submits that as the competent authority has already exercised its power under such provision, this court may not enter into such disputed question of fact and direct the competent authority to refer the petitioner to the principle Civil Court of original jurisdiction of Biswanath district in terms of section 3H(4). 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner as well as respondent No.5 has also not disputed such proposition, rather agrees to the same. 6. This court has also perused the provision of section 3H of National Highways Act, 1956, which deals with deposit and payment of amount. 7. In the case in hand and as recorded hereinabove, the competent authority has already made a determination in favour of the respondent No.5 in terms of Sub-section 3 of section 3H of National Highways Act, 1956. In the given facts of the case, it is seen that the dispute is as regards apportionment of the amount raised by the petitioner. It is also the case of the petitioner that he had already raised such dispute before the competent authority by his representation dated 09.10.2023 (Annexure – G) and it is the Page No.# 4/4 grievance of the petitioner that the same is still pending before the competent authority 8. Responding to such argument, though Mr. Sarma representing the Revenue Authorities submits that in view of the pendency of the writ petition, the revenue authority has not referred the matter to the Principal Civil Judge. 9. In view of the aforesaid, it is directed that the respondent competent authority under the National Highways Act, 1956 which is having jurisdiction in the subject matter of the writ petition, the respondent No.3 i.e., The Additional Deputy Commissioner, (Revenue) Biswanath (CALA) shall do the needful in terms of sub-section 4 section 3H within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order to be furnished by the petitioner before the competent authority. 10. It is provided that after the dispute is referred and placed before the competent Principal Civil Court, the amount already determined in favour of the respondent No.5, be deposited before such court. 11. The writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant