Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010060952025 2025:GAU-AS:14833 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1680/2025 NAYANMANI DEKA S/O- DEBENDRA NATH DEKA, R/O HOUSE NO 2 NEELAM PATH, HATIGARH CHARIALI, P.O- ZOO -ROAD P.S GEETANAGAR, GUWAHATI, DISTRICT- KAMRUP(M), ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, THE REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, JANATA BHAWAN, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6. 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PUBLIC WORKS (ROADS) DEPARTMENT JANATA BHAWAN DISPUR GUWAHATI-6. 3:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWRD NEW GUWAHATI TERRITORIAL DIVISION BAMUNIMAIDAM GUWAHATI-21. 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER KAMRUP(M) GUWAHATI Page No.# 2/5 DIST.- KAMRUP(M) ASSAM. 5:THE ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER I/C LAND ACQUISITION BRANCH KAMRUP(M) DIST.- KAMRUP(M) ASSAM. 6:THE CIRCLE OFFICER DISPUR REVENUE CIRCLE DIBRUGARH ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S BORTHAKUR, MR. D GOGOI Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE, GA, ASSAM,SC, PWD BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY Order 03.11.2025 1. Heard Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. P. R. Mahanta, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department for the respondent No. 1, Mr. B. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, PWD for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and Mr. N. Goswami, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam, for the respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6. 2. The petitioner’s grievance is that a part of the petitioner’s land has been acquired for the purpose of construction of a Flyover at Zoo Road, Guwahati but the compensation amount determined in respect of such acquisition of land has not yet been disbursed to the petitioner. Page No.# 3/5 3. Referring to the notice dated 26.05.2023, Mr. Borthakur, learned counsel for the petitioner claims that though it is shown to be a notice under Section 7(1) of the Assam Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as Act, 1964), however, the said notice shows that the amount had already been determined (Rs.78,13,400.46/-) in favour of the petitioner, whose land was acquired. 4. It is the specific stand of the petitioner that no other notice whatsoever, has been received by the petitioner prior such notice dated 26.05.2023. 5. When this Court sought for instruction, the learned counsel representing the Deputy Commissioner, has forwarded curtain instruction which goes to show that an award was passed in LA Case No. 13/2022 and in terms of the said award, a portion of land measuring 12 lechas of land covered by Dag No. 2458 (Kha) of K.P. Patta No. 1501 under Revenue Village- No. 2 Japorigog, Mouza- Beltola under Dispur Revenue Circle has been acquired for construction of fly over at Zoo road Tiniali as per provision of the Act, 1964. 6. Thereafter, the Circle Officer, Dispur Revenue Circle was asked to submit a report after carrying out a spot verification, so that payment can be released to the actual owner of the land as there are two other co-pattadars. Accordingly, the Circle Officer has submitted a report stating that handhold Chitha copy of Dispur Revenue Circle, name of the petitioner was recorded as pattadar in respect of Dag No. 2458 of KP Patta No. 1501 and as per Dharitri Portal, the Dag No. is recorded as 2458 of KP Patta No. 1601 and for such discrepancy, the Dispur Revenue Circle has asked to submit a fresh report asking actual possession and accordingly, the petitioner was also asked to submit NOC from co-pattadars i.e. Madhab Goswami as well as M/s Build Wall Assam Pvt. Limited. 7. It is also on record that subsequently yet another notice was issued on Page No.# 4/5 01.07.2025 by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, In-charge of land acquisition branch, Kamrup (M) asking the petitioner as well as the other two persons, whose names were reflected in the land record to appear before him on 08.07.2025. Accordingly, though the petitioner appeared before the said authority on 08.07.2025, however, the other two persons did not appear in the said hearing. 8. The respondents by filing their affidavit has also taken a stand that notices were issued, however, no representation was there from those two persons, whose names were reflected in the jamabandi. It is also their contention that due notices were issued in Assam Tribune and Dainik Assam, two daily news papers published from Guwahati directing all the pattadars to attend hearing scheduled on 08.07.2025, however, except the petitioner, none did appear in the aforesaid proceeding. 9. In view of the aforesaid stand, this court is of the opinion that when the persons, whose names are shown are not interested in the hearing nor had they made any claim seeking compensation, the authorities shall not have any difficulty in releasing the compensation in favour of the petitioner, more particularly, when the award was passed in favour of the petitioner not in favour of the said two persons and the discrepancy reflected only on Dharitri portal and admittedly in the chitha copy name of the petitioner is recorded as pattadar. 10. Accordingly, such compensation be released to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from receipt of a certified copy of this order passed today to be furnished by the petitioner before the Collector. It is needless to say that the respondent Collector may insist upon indemnity bond to be furnished by the petitioner, so that in case of subsequent claim, the State respondent can be indemnified by the petitioner. Page No.# 5/5 11. With the aforesaid, writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant