Rokovolie Zumvu v. The Union of India and 3 Ors

ORDER Date : 05-12-2023

¶1Heard Ms. Neiteo Koza, learned counsel for the pe-titioner. Also heard Mr. S.K. Medhi, learned C.G.C for respon-dent Nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. imti Imsong, learned Addl. Advocate General, Nagaland.

¶2The case of the petitioner in brief is that he is the land owner of 2 plots of land located at Zediu and Tsievachie, Nachama Village. The respondent Nos. 1 and 2 constructed a road over the land of the petitioner, in pursuant to the project undertaken for construction of 2 lane road Botsa-Ziezou-New Ralan-Bokajan road under the project 89 RCC/15 BRTF/Project Sewak. However, the petitioner was not given any compensa-tion, despite construction of the road and the damage caused to his property.

¶3Ms. Neiteo Koza, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the name of the petitioner has been inadvertently recorded in the cause list as "Rokovolie Zumvu". The petition-er's counsel submits that though the petitioner's name has been correctly recorded in the cause title and affidavit of the writ petition as "Ruokuovolie Zumvu", the petitioner's name has been incorrectly recorded in the cause list as "Rokovolie" Zumvu".

¶4The learned counsel for the petitioner prays that a direction should be issued to the State respondents, to verify Page No.# 3/5 the damage caused to the petitioner's land and to acquire the land of the petitioner, by paying compensation in terms of the acquisition law followed by the respondents, while acquiring the adjacent lands of other persons for the said project.

¶5Mr. S.K. Medhi, learned C.G.C submits that the re-spondent Nos.1 and 2 had given compensation to land owners on the basis of the report made by the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima. As the name of the petitioner was not amongst the land holders whose lands were effected, in the report made by the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima, no compensation was given to the petitioner.

¶6Mr. Imti Imsong, learned Addl. A.G. submits that the lands of the villagers whose lands were affected by the construction of the road were acquired, on the basis of the re-port made by the concerned village council. As the name of the petitioner had not been provided by the village council, the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima did not include the name of the petitioner among the list of land owners whose lands were ef-fected by the construction of the 2 lane road. He also submits that the road had been constructed in the year 2010-2011 and it would be very difficult now, to ascertain as to whether the petitioner was a effected land owner. He also submits that as the issue here is with regard to whether the petitioner is an ef-fected land owner, the same requires evidence to be adduced.

¶7I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

¶8The affidavit-in-reply of the petitioner to the affi-davit-in-opposition filed by the respondent Nos. 3 and 4, shows that certificates have been issued by the former village Page No.# 4/5 council Chairman of Nachama village, Shri Kevimedo Zumvu dated 7.10.2023 and the present village council Chairman Shri Thepfulhousa Sanchu dated 16.3.2023, stating that the peti-tioner's land had been totally damaged due to the construction of road and that the petitioner has not been given compensa-tion.

¶9There is nothing to prove as to whether any dam-age has been caused to the petitioner's land, as no official records have been maintained by the State respondents. As there are disputed questions of facts, this Court is of the view that the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima should make a verifica-tion report, with regard to whether the petitioner is an af-fected owner of the land, due to the construction of the 2 lane road under project 89 RCC/15 BRTF/Project Sewak. The verifi-cation report by the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima should be made after calling for the participation of the respondent Nos. 1 & 2, the petitioner and the village council Chairman of the concerned village in the verification process. The said verifica-tion report should be made within a period of 3 months, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶10If the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima comes to a finding that the petitioner is an affected land owner due to the construction of the road on the land of the petitioner, the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima shall make an assessment of the compensation to be paid to the petitioner, in terms of the land acquisition law that has been applied for acquiring adja-cent lands for the said project, within a further period of 2 months. Thereafter, the payment to be made, if any, should be Page No.# 5/5 deposited by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 before the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima, who shall disburse the same to the pe-titioner. It is needless to add that if the respondents are ag-grieved by the verification report made by the Deputy Com-missioner, Kohima, they are at liberty to challenge the same before the appropriate forum.

¶11With regard to the submission made by the peti-tioner's counsel regarding the wrong recording of the petition-er's name in the cause list, I also find the same to be true, though the petitioner's name has also been recorded wrongly in page No.1 & 4 of the writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

Sd/- JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/5 GAHC020007062021 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH Case No. : WP(C)/358/2021 ROKOVOLIE ZUMVU S/O KELHOUVILIE ZUMVU, PERMANENT R/O NACHAMA VILLAGE, NEAR GPS NACHAMA, DISTRICT - KOHIMA, NAGALAND VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR GENERAL BORDER ROADS ORGANIZATION SEEMA SADAK BHAWAN, RING ROAD NARAINA, DELHI CANTT. NEW DELHI - 110010 2:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER 89 RCC (GREF), SECHU ZUBZA 3:THE STATE OF NAGALAND THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF NAGALAND NAGALAND KOHIMA 4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KOHIMA NAGALAND Advocate for the Petitioner : NEITEO KOZA Advocate for the Respondent : CGSC Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA