Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010236592025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Review.Pet./257/2025 N F RAILWAY, REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER CONSTRUCTION KAWNPUI N F RAILWAY VERSUS THE STATE OF MIZORAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF MIZORAM LAND REVENUE AND SETTLEMENT DEPARTMENT NEW CAPITAL COMPLEX KHATLA, AIZAWL MIZORAM 2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CUM DISTRICT COLLECTOR KOLASIB DISTRICT MIZORAM 3:THE SETTLEMENT OFFICER LAND REVENUE AND SETTLEMENT DEPARTMENT KOLASIB DISTRICT 4:F LALHUNGLIANA BAWNGKAWN SOUTH AIZAWL MIZORA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S K MEDHI, Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA ORDER 13.11.2025 1. Heard Mr. S.K. Medhi, learned counsel for the review petitioner, i.e. NF Page No.# 2/3 Railway. Also heard Ms. P. Bhattacharya, learned Additional Advocate General, Mizoram for the respondent nos.1, 2 & 3. 2. The review petitioner has prayed for a review of the order dated 19.03.2020 passed by this Court in WP(C) 148/2019, wherein the respondents were directed to constitute a Verification Team to verify, as to whether the two plots of lands of the petitioner therein should be acquired under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 or he should be paid damages for the damage caused to his lands, on account of the Railways having damaged the land of the petitioner therein. 3. The learned counsel for the review petitioner submits that this Court in the impugned order dated 19.03.2020 had directed that the two plots of lands covered by Periodic Passes 501801/10/58 of 2025 and 501801/10/59 of 2025 should be verified in terms of the directions passed as above. However, it has now been ascertained after verification, that while Periodic Pass 501801/10/58 of 2025 belonged to the petitioner in WP(C) 148/2019, the other land covered by Periodic Pass 501801/10/59 belonged to the wife of the writ petitioner. He accordingly submits that there should be a review of the order dated 19.03.2020 passed in WP(C) 148/2019, inasmuch as, the writ petitioner in WP(C) 148/2019 was not the owner of both the plots of lands. 4. This Court at the outset finds that the directions passed, vide order dated 19.03.2020 in WP(C) 148/2019, had been complied with, inasmuch as, a Page No.# 3/3 Verification Team had been constituted and a Verification Report made. Thereafter, pursuant to the Verification Report made, the District Collector, Kolasib District, Mizoram had made an assessment of the damages payable to the writ petitioner therein and his wife, in respect of both the plots of lands as mentioned above. 5. The review petitioner had put to challenge the assessment of damages payable to the petitioner and his wife made by the District Collector by way of WP(C) 112/2024. However, WP(C) 112/2024 was dismissed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, on the ground that the alleged non-compliance of the impugned order dated 19.03.2020 passed in WP(C) 148/2019 and the Verification Reports etc. were issues in Contempt Cas(C) No.8/2022. Further, in Contempt Cas(C) No.8/2022, the Court had given liberty to the review petitioner herein, to file the present review petition. 6. On considering the fact that the directions passed by this Court in the impugned order dated 19.03.2020 passed in WP(C) 148/2019 has already been complied with, there is nothing to be reviewed. If the review petitioner is not happy with the Verification Report and the contents therein, the same should be put to challenge by way of an appropriate petition before an appropriate Forum. If the challenge failed, there is no bar for the review petitioner to approach the higher forum with his grievance. However, as no grounds for review have been made out, the review petition stands dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant