Cont.(Cvl)/697/2026 of AINA DEVI Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 7 September 2026

1. Aina Devi, aged about 50 years, W/o Late Madan Yadav

2. Kumar Sameer, aged about 25 years, S/o Late Madan Yadav Both resident of Panchayat Suriya Khurd, Block Suriya, Village Chotki Suriya, P.O & P.S. Suriya, District Giridih, Jharkhand

…. …. Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Chandra Shekhar, Son of Not Known, The Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration & Land Reforms, Project Bhawan, Dhurwa, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, District Ranchi, Jharkhand

3. Ramniwas Yadav, S/O Not Known, The Deputy Commissioner, Giridih, having its office at Collectorate building on Court Road, near Jhanda Maidan, New Barganda, P.O & P.S Barganda, District Giridih, Jharkhand

4. Santosh Kumar, S/O Not Known, Circle Officer, Sariya, P.O. & P.S. Sariya, District Giridih, Jharkhand

5. Bhola Ram, S/O S.N. Ram, The Executive Engineer, RDD (RDSD) R/O Punjabi Kothi, Matakpur, P.O, P.S & District Giridih, Jharkhand

..... .... Opp. Parties

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD

For the Petitioners : Mr. Rishu Ranjan, Advocate

Mr. Chiranjeev Bhadoria, Advocate

For O.P. No.3 : Mr. Indranil Bhaduri, SC-IV

------

08/Dated: 07.09.2026

1. The affidavit has been filed by the opposite party no.3 stating inter-alia therein that the process has been initiated for acquisition of land and as per the mandate of statute as contained under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, a sum of Rs.20,79,059.00/- has been calculated so that the further necessary action be taken for acquisition of land, as would be evident from Annexure-B appended to the suppl. show cause reply.

2. Mr. Indranil Bhaduri, learned counsel appearing for the concerned opposite party by referring to communication dated 18.08.2026 has submitted that after the issue of acquisition having been gazetted, if the amount may be exceeded from a sum of Rs.20,79,059.00/-, then, the excess amount will be paid.

3. It has also been submitted that the said amount also includes the trees which were available in the land in question including the interest.

4. Mr. Bhaduri, learned counsel for opposite party no.3 has submitted that the process is on and the amount will be paid only after the gazette notification for which the statutory period is sixty days.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has agreed to the calculation so made said to be estimated (appended as Annexure-A to the suppl. show cause reply), subject to the final calculation as per the letter dated 18.08.2026, appended as Annexure-B to the suppl. show cause reply and the settlement of issue in between the parties has been arrived at, for ready reference, the factum of settlement of issue in between the parties is being reflected from statement made at paragraph-5 to the affidavit dated 03.09.2026 which is being quoted hereinbelow:- “That the answering opposite party most humbly and respectfully submits that the District Land Acquisition Officer, Giridih, vie its Letter no.795 dated 22.08.2026 has reported that in view of further deliberation made with the petitioner, the issue of payment of compensation has finally been resolved through settlement. Copy of terms of settlement signed by the petitioner no.2, who was duly authorized by petitioner no. 1, as well as members of three-man committee along with two witnesses was annexed with the said letter.”

6. Since the undertaking has been furnished by Mr. Bhaduri, learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.3, on instruction, that after the issue of acquisition having been gazetted, for which, a statutory period is sixty days and immediately thereafter, the amount will be paid, therefore, this Court is of the view that the instant contempt case needs to be disposed of.

7. Accordingly, the instant contempt case stands disposed of. However, with liberty to the petitioners to make an application in case of non-compliance of the statement so made in the affidavit dated 03.09.2026, based upon the communication dated 18.08.2026 appended as Annexure-B to suppl. show cause reply.

8. In view thereof, the instant contempt case stands disposed of with the liberty aforesaid.

9. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

(Sanjay Prasad, J.) 07.09.2026 Rohit/-