As per case facts, petitioners were dispossessed of land due to highway expansion and sought compensation. A notification indicated compensation for affected land. An assessment was made, and an estimate ...
No Acts & Articles mentioned in this case
Page No.# 1/15
GAHC040012602022 2026:GAU-AP:343
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/380/2022
Debia Tamin
S/o Shri Debia Takam,
Resident of P Sector, Nirjuli, PO and PS Doimukh, District Papumpare, Arunachal
Pradesh.
Mobile No. 7085778748
VERSUS
THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.
Represented by the Commissioner (Land Management), Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh,
Itanagar.
2:The Chief Engineer
Age: 0
Occupation :
Highway PWD
Mowb II Itanagar
Arunachal Pradesh.
3:The Deputy Commissioner
Age: 0
Occupation :
Capital Complex
Itanagar
Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh
Advocate for the Petitioner : Pritam Taffo, Minter Karbak,V Mandal,V Dolo
Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP), Rintu Saikia,SC(Highway)
Page No.# 2/15
Linked Case : WP(C)/357/2022
Tame Anuk
Age: 45
Occupation :
Address:S/o Lt. Tame Takio
Permanent Resident of Hiya Village
PO/PS Nyapin
District Kurung Kumey
Arunachal Pradesh. Mobile No. 9402277898
VERSUS
THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Represented by the Commissioner (Land Management) Govt. of Arunachal
Pradesh
Itanagar.
2:The Chief Engineer
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Highway PWD
Mowb II
Itanagar
Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh.
3:The Deputy Commissioner
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Itanagar Capital Complex Itanagar
Govt. of Arunchal Pradesh.
------------
Advocate for : Pritam Taffo
Advocate for : GA (AP) appearing for THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.: Advocate ,
, appearing for 2,
3, respectively.
Linked Case : WP(C)/85/2024
Debia Niya
Page No.# 3/15
Age: 26
Occupation :
Address:Son of Debia Meli
resident of Deed Village
PO and PS Ziro
Lower Subansiri District
Arunachal Pradesh
VERSUS
The State of AP and 3 Ors
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:represented by the Secretary
Land Management
Govt of Arunachal Pradesh
Itanagar
2:The Secertary
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Land Management
Govt of Arunachal Pradesh
Itanagar
3:The Chief Engineer
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Highway PWD
Mowb -II
Itanagar
Arunachal Pradesh
4:The Deputy Commisiosner
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Capital Complex
Itanagar
Govt of Arunachal Pradesh.
------------
Advocate for : Pritam Taffo
Advocate for : GA (AP) appearing for The State of AP and 3 Ors: Advocate ,
,
, appearing for 2,
3,
Page No.# 4/15
4, respectively.
Linked Case : WP(C)/382/2022
Kipa Meena
Age: 41
Occupation :
Address:W/o Shri Kipa Natung
Resident of Damsite
Naharlatgun
PO and PS Naharlagun
District Papum Pare
Arunachal Preadesh 790102
Phone No. 9402853522
VERSUS
THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Represented by the Commissioner (Land Management)
Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh
Itanagar.
2:The Chief Engineer
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Highway PWD
Mowb II
Itanagar
Arunachal Pradesh.
3:The Deputy Commissioner
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Capital Complex
Itanagar
Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh.
------------
Advocate for : Pritam Taffo
Advocate for : GA (AP) appearing for THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.: Advocate ,
, appearing for 2,
3, respectively.
Page No.# 5/15
Linked Case : WP(C)/384/2022
Kipa Nuka
Age: 23
Occupation :
Address:S/o Shri Kipa Natung
Resident of Damsite
Naharlagun
PO and PS Naharlagun
District Papum Pare
Arunachal Pradesh 790102
Mobile No 7638823651
VERSUS
THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Represented by the Commissioner (Land Management)
Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh
Itanagar.
2:The Chief Engineer
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Highway PWD
Mowb II
Itanagar
Arunachal Pradesh.
3:The Deputy Commissioner
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Capital Complex
Itanagar
Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh.
------------
Advocate for : Pritam Taffo
Advocate for : GA (AP) appearing for THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.: Advocate ,
, appearing for 2,
3, respectively.
Page No.# 6/15
Linked Case : WP(C)/383/2022
Kipa Anyi
Age: 26
Occupation :
Address:D/o Shri Kipa Natung
Resident of Damsite
Naharlagun
PO and PS Naharlagun
District Papum Pare
Arunachal Pradesh 790102. Mobile No. 9436409458
VERSUS
THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Represented by the Commissioner (Land Management) Govt. of Arunachal
Pradesh
Itanagar.
2:The Chief Engineer
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Highway PWD
Mowb II
Itanagar
Arunachal Pradesh.
3:The Deputy Commissioner
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Capital Complex
Itanagar
Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh.
------------
Advocate for : Pritam Taffo
Advocate for : GA (AP) appearing for THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.: Advocate ,
, appearing for 2,
3, respectively.
Linked Case : WP(C)/409/2022
Tarh Akak Antoni
Page No.# 7/15
Age: 43
Occupation :
Address:S/o Shri Tarh Takia
Resident of Nirjuli
PO and PS Nirjuli
District Papum Pare
Arunachal Pradesh 791110. Mobile No 9612541418
VERSUS
THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Represented by the Commissioner (Land Management) Govt. of Arunachal
Pradesh
Itanagar.
2:The Chief Engineer
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Highway
PWD
Mowb II Itanagar
Arunachal Pradesh
Itanagar.
3:The Deputy Commissioner
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Capital Complex
Itanagar
Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh.
------------
Advocate for : Pritam Taffo
Advocate for : GA (AP) appearing for THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.: Advocate ,
, appearing for 2,
3, respectively.
Linked Case : WP(C)/419/2022
Tarh Akak Antoni
Age: 43
Occupation :
Address:S/o Shri Tarh Takia
Page No.# 8/15
Resident of Nirjuli
PO and PS Nirjuli
District Papum Pare
Arunachal Pradesh 791110
Mobile No. 9612541418
VERSUS
THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Represented by the Commissioner (Land Management) Govt. of Arunachal
Pradesh. Itanagar.
2:The Chief Engineer
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Highway PWD
Mowb II Itanagar
Arunachal Pradesh.
3:The Deputy Commissioner
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Capital Complex
Itanagar
Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh.
------------
Advocate for : Pritam Taffo
Advocate for : GA (AP) appearing for THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.: Advocate ,
, appearing for 2,
3, respectively.
Linked Case : WP(C)/381/2022
Kipa Natung
Age: 45
Occupation :
Address:S/o Shri Kipa Tashi
Residence of Damsite
Naharlagun
PO and PS Naharlagun
District Papumpare
Arunachal Pradesh 790102
Page No.# 9/15
Phone No. 9436409458
VERSUS
THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Represented by the Commissioner (Land Management)
Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh
Itanagar.
2:The Chief Engineer
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Highway PWD
Mowb II
Itanagar
Arunachal Pradesh.
3:The Deputy Commissioner
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Capital Complex
Itanagar
Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh.
------------
Advocate for : Pritam Taffo
Advocate for : GA (AP) appearing for THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.: Advocate ,
, appearing for 2,
3, respectively.
Linked Case : WP(C)/377/2022
Gyamar Yaso
Age: 46
Occupation :
Address:W/o Shri Gyamar Siram
Resident of Banderdewa 5/1
PO/PS Banderdewa
District Papumpare
Arunachal Pradesh.
Mobile No. 9436637999
VERSUS
Page No.# 10/15
THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Represented by the Commissioner (Land Management)
Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh
Itanagar.
2:The Chief Engineer
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Highway
PWD
Mowb II
Itanagar
Arunachal Pradesh.
3:The Deputy Commissioner
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Capital Complex
Itanagar
Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh.
------------
Advocate for : Pritam Taffo
Advocate for : GA (AP) appearing for THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.: Advocate ,
, appearing for 2,
3, respectively.
Linked Case : WP(C)/378/2022
Gyamar Mindu
Age: 26
Occupation :
Address:S/o Shri Gyamar Siram
Resident of Banderdewa 5/1
PO and PS Banderdewa
District Papumpare
Arunachal Pradesh.
Mobile No. 94366442503
VERSUS
THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.
Page No.# 11/15
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Represented by the Commissioner (Land Management)
Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh
Itanagar.
2:The Chief Engineer
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Highway
PWD
Mowb II
Itanagar
Arunachal Pradesh.
3:The Deputy Commissioner
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Capital Complex
Itanagar
Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh.
------------
Advocate for : Pritam Taffo
Advocate for : GA (AP) appearing for THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.: Advocate ,
, appearing for 2,
3, respectively.
Linked Case : WP(C)/379/2022
Gyamar Tutu
Age: 40
Occupation :
Address:W/o Shri Gyamar Siram
Resident of Banderdewa
5/1
PO and PS Banderdewa
District Papumpare
Arunachal Pradesh.
Mobile No. 9436637999
VERSUS
THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.
Age: 0
Page No.# 12/15
Occupation :
Address:Represented by the Commissioner (Land Management)
Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh
Itanagar.
2:The Chief Engineer
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Highway PWD
Mowb II
Itanagar
Arunachal Pradesh.
3:The Deputy Commissioner
Age: 0
Occupation :
Address:Capital Complex
Itanagar
Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh.
------------
Advocate for : Pritam Taffo
Advocate for : GA (AP) appearing for THE STATE OF AP and 2 Ors.: Advocate ,
, appearing for 2,
3, respectively.
B E F O R E
Hon’ble MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
Advocates for the petitioner: Shri P. Taffo
Advocates for the respondents: Shri S. Tapin, Sr.GA, AP
Date of hearing and Judgment : 06.04.2026
Judgment & Order (oral)
The cause of action in these writ petitions being common, the same are
taken up for an analogous hearing and are disposed of by this common
judgment and order. The claim is with regard to payment of compensation for
land which were in the possession of the petitioners.
Page No.# 13/15
2. Bereft of details, as per the facts projected, there was an expansion and
broadening of the highway from Itanagar to Banderdewa and the present claim
is for the stretch from Nirjuli to Bandardeva. It is contended on behalf of the
petitioners that there was no formal land acquisition proceeding and on the
other hand, a Notification dated 29.03.2016 was published as per which,
compensation would be given to the land affected persons by the Right of Way
and the new alignment of the road. It is the specific case of the petitioners that
they fell within the category of such land affected persons, who were
dispossessed from the lands under their possession due to the new alignment.
3. I have heard Shri P. Taffo, learned counsel for the petitioners. I have also
heard Shri S. Tapin, learned Senior Government Advocate, AP.
4. Shri Taffo, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in terms
of the notification dated 29.03.2016, assessment of the compensation was
made by the concerned Deputy Commissioner, Itanagar Capital Complex and
Estimate was prepared on individual basis. The same was sent for approval to
the Ministry of Road Transport and Highway, Government of India which was
accordingly approved 08.07.2016 and the amount was accordingly deposited in
the Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Itanagar Capital Complex.
5. It is the specific case of the petitioners that while such compensation has
been released to all other affected persons, the same has not been released to
the petitioners on the pretext that, in the meantime, there was a Cabinet
decision that the claims were required to be verified. The learned counsel for
the petitioners has however fairly submitted that though there was also a claim
of solatium in the claim made, the said aspect would be foregone and the
present claim would be on the amount which has been estimated by the
Ministry. It is contended that on some pretext or the other, the matter was
Page No.# 14/15
delayed and new Committees were formed for fresh assessment and verification
which dragged the process and which was wholly unjustified. He has submitted
that when all other similarly situated persons affected by the expansion and
broadening of the Highway have been paid, the petitioners cannot be left out.
6. As regards the stand of the State, the learned counsel for the petitioners
has submitted that in the affidavit filed by the respondent no. 3, it has been
contended that the land falls under the Durpong Reserve Forest. He however
submits that if that be the case, the entire stretch would be similarly situated
and other affected persons have been paid the compensation and therefore, the
same cannot be a reason for denial of the legal entitlements of the petitioners in
these writ petitions.
7. Shri Tapin, learned Senior Government Advocate has however submitted
that the non-payment of the compensation is justified for more than one
reason. He has submitted that there was a Cabinet decision for verification of
the claim which was purely in the public interest and to prevent misuse of public
funds. He has also submitted that the land falls under the Durpong Reserve
Forest and without the approval of the Forest Department, no compensation is
liable to be paid to the public. He has referred to the Cabinet decision dated
21.05.2021 and has submitted that such decision was in consonance with the
earlier decision of the year 2016 which is mainly in the interest of public.
8. The rival submissions have been duly considered and the materials placed
before this Court have been carefully examined.
9. It is not in dispute that the petitioners were affected by the expansion and
widening of the Highway, as mentioned above. It is also not in dispute that an
assessment of the compensation was done in the year 2016 by the Deputy
Page No.# 15/15
Commissioner and an Estimate was prepared which was sent for approval to the
Ministry of Road Transport and Highways. The said Ministry vide communication
dated 30.11.2016 had approved the Estimate which presupposes that necessary
verification and due diligence exercise was done. The fact that all other similarly
situated persons have been paid the compensation would fortify the present
claim of the petitioner, who are admittedly similarly situated as their names are
there in the Estimate prepared.
10. So far as the stand of the State is concerned that the land falls under the
Durpong Reserve Forest, this Court is of the opinion that while such a stand
would be justified in an appropriate case, in the instance case, when the
compensation has been assessed and approved by the Central Government in
the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways and all other similarly situated
affected persons have been paid, it would not at all be reasonable to deny the
present petitioners from the compensation as per the Estimate prepared in the
year 2016. This Court, however, lays a caveat that the present direction for
making the payment would not be treated as a precedent.
11. In view of the aforesaid discussion, all the writ petitions are disposed of
by directing the State respondents including the Deputy Commissioner, Itanagar
Capital Complex to take all necessary steps for releasing the estimated amount
to the petitioners which, however, can be preceded by a verification of their
identity, so that payment are not made to any wrong person.
12. As indicated above, the present direction is not to be treated as a
precedent.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
Legal Notes
Add a Note....