Page No.# 1/4 GAHC040015062023 2025:GAU-AP:328 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/525/2023 Singchung Village Council Land Management Committee (SVCLMC) and 2 Ors. an organization for and amongst the residents of Singchung village represented by Shri Naresh Glow, Chairman, SVCLMC, Tenga Market, PO Tenga, PS Rupa, District West Kameng, Arunachal Pradesh. 2: Naresh Glow Age: Occupation : Chairman SVCLMC Tenga Market PO Tenga PS Rupa District West Kameng Arunachal Pradesh 3: Rinchin Sarai Age: Occupation : Tenga Market PO Tenga PS Rupa District West Kameng Arunachal Prades VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA and 5 Ors. represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Defence, Government of India, Cabinet Secretariat, Raisina Hill, New Delhi 110001 2:The Director General Age: 0 Occupation : Page No.# 2/4 Border Road Organization (BRO) Seema Sadak Bhawan Ring Road Naraina Delhi Cantt New Delhi 110010 3:The Commander Age: 0 Occupation : Head Quarter 14 BRTF C/O 99 APO 4:The Officer Commanding Age: 0 Occupation : 91 RCC (GREF) C/O 99 APO 5:The State of Arunachal Pradesh Age: 0 Occupation : represented by the Commissioner land Management Department Itanagar. 6:The Deputy Commissioner Age: 0 Occupation : Bomdila West Kameng District Arunachal Pradesh Advocate for the Petitioner : T Pertin, Eddie Payeng,T Mize,Mingkong Pertin,H K Jamoh Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP), SC(Land Management),Dugmar Kamduk,DSGI,Marto Kato Page No.# 3/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG ORDER Date : 17-03-2025 Heard Mr. T. Pertin, learned counsel for the petitioner. I have also heard Mr. M. Kato, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 4, Mr. D. Kamduk, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5 and Ms. G. Ete, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the respondent no. 6. 2. At this stage, Mr. T. Pertin, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the compensation award of the land acquired under the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, (for short, LARR Act), the interest is not added to the land and acquired properties. However, the interest has been calculated on the rent under the provision of Section 80 of the said Act. Thus, he submits that the authority has made an error of adding the component of interest on rent. Accordingly, he submits that the said correction is required to be made in the computation of the interest. 3. In light of the above, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays for allowing him to make a representation before the concerned authority highlighting the mistakes in the pattern and system in the calculation of the annual interest over the compensation amount and arrear rent, as the provisions of the law has not been applied appropriately. 4. The learned counsel for the respondents has no objection in allowing the petitioner’s prayer to make appropriate representation before the appropriate Page No.# 4/4 authority. 5. In view of the above, and as agreed upon by the parties, this writ petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner as prayed for making a representation before the appropriate authority highlighting the discrepancies in the compensation awarded to the petitioner. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant