Page No.# 1/9 GAHC010036202023 2026:GAU-AS:13173 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/966/2023 ROSA ROSHIE TOKBIPI W/O- LT. NOKEN ENGLENG, D/O- ANNAN TOKBIPI, R/O- NAHORJAN BLOCK-1, NEAR FOREST BEAT OFFICE, P.O. AND P.S. DILLAI, DIST.- KARBI ANGLONG, ASSAM, PIN- 782480 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 9 ORS. THROUGH THE SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAY, GOVT. OF INDIA, NEW DELHI, PIN- 110001 2:THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED A PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKING BELONGING TO GOVT. OF INDIA SITUATED AT 3RD FLOOR PTI BUILDING 4 PARLIAMENT STREET NEW DELHI PIN- 110001 REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR 3:THE STATE OF ASSAM THROUGH THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DEPTT. OF HILLS AREAS DISPUR GHY-06 4:THE KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL REP. BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE MEMBER KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL DIPHU KARBI ANGLONG Page No.# 2/9 ASSAM PIN- 782461 5:THE EXECUTIVE MEMBER DEPTT. OF REVENUE KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL DIPHU PIN- 782461 6:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL DIPHU PIN- 782461 7:THE JOINT SECRETARY THE DEPTT. OF REVENUE KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL DIPHU KARBI ANGLONG PIN- 782461 8:THE ASSTT. SETTLEMENT OFFICER KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL DIPHU KARBI ANGLONG PIN- 782461 9:THE ASSTT. REVENUE OFFICER KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL DIPHU PIN- 782461 10:ANGTONG BEY S/O- KEHAI BEY R/O- NAHORJAN BLOCK-1 P.O. AND P.S. DILLAI DIST.- KARBI ANGLONG ASSA BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH Advocate for the Petitioner(s) : Ms. K.L.R. Yanthan, Advocate Advocate for the Respondent(s): Mr. V. L. Singh, Advocate Page No.# 3/9 Mr. S. S. Roy, Govt. Advocate Mr. J. Chutia, SC, KAAC Date on which judgment is reserved : NA Date of pronouncement of judgment : 09.09.2026 Whether the pronouncement is of the Operative part of the judgment? : Yes Whether the full judgment has been Pronounced? : No. JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) Heard Ms. K.L.R. Yanthan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner. Mr. V. L. Singh, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the Respondent Nos.1 & 2; Mr. S. S. Roy, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the Respondent No.3 and Mr. J. Chutia, the learned Standing Counsel of the KAAC appears on behalf of the Respondent Nos.4 to 9. 2. The case of the Petitioner herein is that the Petitioner is the owner of a plot of land admeasuring 0.0268 hectare of village Nahorjan, Mouza-Borjan in the district of Karbi Anglong covered by Dag No.70 and included in Periodic Khiraj Patta No.30. The grievance of the Petitioner herein is that in the Notification dated 24.03.2022 issued under Section 3D of the National Highways Act, 1956, the name of the Respondent No.10 appears at Serial No.173 against Dag No.70 of Patta No.70 which is actually the Page No.# 4/9 Petitioner's land. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submitted that the compensation in respect to the said land pertaining to Dag No.70 of Periodic Patta No.30 which has been wrongly reflected as Patta No.70, should have been paid to the Petitioner, but steps were taken to make payment to the Respondent No.10, and it is under such circumstances, the Petitioner has approached this Court. 4. This Court finds it very pertinent to take note of that Section 3H of the National Highways Act, 1956 is a complete Code in itself in so far as disbursement of compensation. In terms with Section 3H(3), the Competent Authority of Land Acquisition has been empowered to decide disputes pertaining to payment of compensation. However, if the disputes in question are of complex nature relating to entitlement of compensation or apportionment of the compensation, the Competent Authority of Land Acquisition cannot exercise such jurisdiction. In a recent judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of K. Venkataswamy and Others vs. Gowramma and Another, reported in 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1487 wherein the Supreme Court explained the scope and ambit of Section 3H of the Act of 1956. Paragraph Nos.22.1 to 22.7 being relevant are reproduced herein under:- Page No.# 5/9 “22.1. At this stage, it becomes necessary to examine the true scope and ambit of Section 3H of the National Highways Act, 1956. Since the controversy in the present appeal turns upon the interpretation of sub-section (4) thereof, the relevant provisions are extracted below:— "3H. Deposit and payment of amount.— (1) The amount determined under section 3G shall be deposited by the Central Government in such manner as may be laid down by rules made in this behalf by that Government, with the competent authority before taking possession of the land. (2) As soon as may be after the amount has been deposited under sub-section (1), the competent authority shall on behalf of the Central Government pay the amount to the person or persons entitled thereto. (3) Where several persons claim to be interested in the amount deposited under sub-section (1), the competent authority shall determine the persons who in its opinion are entitled to receive the amount payable to each of them. (4) If any dispute arises as to the apportionment of the amount or any part thereof or to any person to whom the same or any part thereof is payable, the competent authority shall refer the dispute to the decision of the principal civil court of original jurisdiction within the limits of whose jurisdiction the land is situated." "... 22.2. Section 3H was introduced by Act 16 of 1997 as part of the comprehensive legislative framework governing acquisition of land Page No.# 6/9 for National Highways. While the amendment sought to facilitate expeditious acquisition for development of national highway infrastructure, it simultaneously recognised the corresponding right of persons deprived of their property to receive just compensation. 22.3. The scheme of Sections 3G and 3H is, therefore, complementary. Section 3G provides for determination of the amount payable upon acquisition, whereas Section 3H prescribes the mechanism for its deposit and disbursement. Under sub-section (2), the competent authority is under a statutory obligation to disburse the compensation to the person or persons entitled thereto. Where rival claims are raised, sub-section (3) casts a further duty upon the competent authority to determine, in its opinion, the persons entitled to receive the compensation and the extent of their respective shares. 22.4. Recognising, however, that disputes of a more complex nature may arise, Parliament enacted sub-section (4). It provides that where any dispute arises either regarding the apportionment of the compensation or regarding the person to whom the compensation, or any part thereof, is payable, the competent authority shall refer the dispute to the principal civil court of original jurisdiction within whose territorial jurisdiction the acquired land is situated. 22.5. The expression "any person to whom the amount... is payable" cannot be read in isolation or assigned a narrow meaning. The entitlement to receive compensation necessarily flows from the legal right over the acquired property immediately prior to its acquisition. Consequently, where rival claimants assert competing Page No.# 7/9 rights to the acquired land, the determination of the person entitled to receive compensation inevitably requires an adjudication of the underlying claim of title. Such an inquiry is incidental and integral to the jurisdiction conferred under Section 3H(4). 22.6. We are, therefore, unable to concur with the view taken by the High Court that the Reference Court lacks jurisdiction to examine disputes relating to title. To accept such an interpretation would render the expression "person to whom the amount is payable" otiose and substantially defeat the object of the reference contemplated under Section 3H(4). A reference to the principal civil court is not intended to be a mere ministerial purpose of dividing the compensation amongst claimants. Its purpose is to secure a judicial determination of the person lawfully entitled to receive the compensation where such entitlement itself is disputed. 22.7. The jurisdiction exercised by the Reference Court under Section 3H(4) is, therefore, wide enough to incidentally determine questions of title insofar as such determination is necessary for deciding the person entitled to the compensation arising out of the acquisition. Any contrary interpretation would frustrate the legislative scheme and compel parties to simultaneously pursue independent civil suits for declaration of title, thereby defeating the very object of referring the dispute to the principal civil court.” 5. From a perusal of the above quoted Paragraphs, it would show that the Competent Authority of Land Acquisition has been conferred with the power to decide the disputes as regards Page No.# 8/9 entitlement and apportionment. However, if the disputes are of complex nature which would require going into details on the question of title etc., then it is the Principal Civil Court of Original Jurisdiction within whose jurisdiction the land had been acquired who can decide the question of entitlement of the compensation as well as the apportionment of the compensation. The Supreme Court further observed that while deciding the entitlement as well as the apportionment of the compensation, the Principal Civil Court of Original Jurisdiction can also incidentally decide the question of title to determine the question of entitlement as well as the apportionment of the compensation. 6. Taking into account the above proposition of law, this Court therefore disposes of the instant writ petition with the following observations and directions:- (i) The Respondent No.7 who is the Competent Authority of Land Acquisition in the district of Karbi Anglong is directed to refer the dispute as regards the entitlement and/or apportionment of the compensation in respect to the land mentioned at Serial No.173 of the Notification dated 24.03.2022 to the Court of the learned District Judge, Karbi Anglong to decide as to whether the Petitioner would be entitled to the compensation or the Respondent No.10. The said steps to be taken forthwith and not later than 15 days Page No.# 9/9 from the date of submission of the certified copy of the instant judgment. (ii) The learned District Judge, Karbi Anglong on receipt of the said reference shall decide the same by taking into account the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of K. Venkataswamy and Others (supra). (iii) If any payment had already been disbursed by the Respondent No.7 in the meantime during the pendency of the writ petition or prior thereto, the same shall be subject to the outcome of the reference proceedings. JUDGE Comparing Assistant Pradip Kumar Kalita Digitally signed by Pradip Kumar Kalita Date: 2026.09.15 11:01:16 +05'30'