IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
( The High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Manipur, Tripura, Mizoram
and Arunachal Pradesh)
WP(C) No. 153(AP)/2012
1.
Shri Leiki Khandu (Goanbura)
Son of late Pema, Village-Lish,
P.O & P.S. Dirang,District West Kameng.
Arunachal Pradesh.
2.
Smt. Phurpa,
D/o late Sangja,Village-Dirang
P.O & P.S. Dirang,District West Kameng.
Arunachal Pradesh.
3.
Sri Doma Tsering.
S/o late Tsering Dorjee,Village –Dirang,
P.O & P.S. Dirang,District West Kameng.
Arunachal Pradesh.
4.
Smt. Tsering Drema,
D/o late Ngawang,Village -Dirang
P.O & P.S. Dirang,District West Kameng.
Arunachal Pradesh.
5.
Sri Tsewang Dorjee,
S/o late Jurme,Village-Dirang
P.O & P.S. Dirang,District West Kameng.
Arunachal Pradesh.
6.
Sri Dorjee Tashi
S/o late Tashi Tsering,Village-Rama Camp,
P.O & P.S. Dirang,District West Kameng.
Arunachal Pradesh.
7.
Sri Genden,
S/o late Lama Kunjang,Village-Rama Camp,
2
P.O & P.S. Dirang,District West Kameng.
Arunachal Pradesh.
8.
Sri Sange,
Son of Sri Tsering Darge,Village- Rama Camp,
P.O & P.S,Dirang,District West Kameng,
Arunachal Pradesh,
9.
Sri Tashi Norbu,
Son of late Lama Kunjang,Village- Rama Camp,
P.O & P.S,Dirang,District West Kameng,
Arunachal Pradesh.
10.
Sri Karchung,
Son of late Leiki Sonam, Village Rama Camp,
P.O & P.S. Dirang ,District West Kameng,
Arunachal Pradesh.
11.
Sri Tenzin Gyatso Bapu.
Son of late Serkong Bapu,Village- Rama Camp,
P.O & P.S,Dirang,District West Kameng,
Arunachal Pradesh
12.
Sri Dorje Wangdi,
Son of Sri Sangja Gombu,Village- Rama Camp,
P.O & P.S,Dirang,District West Kameng,
Arunachal Pradesh
13.
Sri Lobsanh Tashi,
Son of late Sang Tsering ,Village- Rama Camp,
P.O & P.S,Dirang,District West Kameng,
Arunachal Pradesh
14.
Sri Tsering,
Son of late Gombu,Village- Rama Camp,
P.O & P.S,Dirang,District West Kameng,
Arunachal Pradesh.
15.
Sri Rinchin Khandu,
Son of late Tukpa Wangdi,Village –Rama Camp,
3
P.O & P.S,Dirang,District West Kameng,
Arunachal Pradesh
16.
Smti Leiki Chhoijom
D/o late Tsethar,Village- Rama Camp,
P.O & P.S,Dirang,District West Kameng,
Arunachal Pradesh
…………… Petitioners
-Versus1.
The State of Arunachal Pradesh
Represented by the Chief Secretary,
Government of Arunachal Pradesh,
Itanagar.
2.
The Commissioner,
Department of Land Management,
Itanagar, Government of Arunachal Pradesh.
3.
The Director,
Department of Land Management,
Government of Arunachal Pradesh.
4.
The Deputy Commissioner,
Bomdila,West Kameng,District,
Arunachal Pradesh.
5.
The Additional Deputy Commissioner,
Dirang Circle,West Kameng District,
Arunachal Pradesh.
6.
The Circle Officer,
Dirang Circle,District West kameng,
Arunachal Pradesh.
7.
The Compensation Board through the
Additional Deputy Commissioner,
Dirang Circle,West Kameng District,
Arunachal Pradesh.
8.
The Director General of Border Roads,
4
Seema Sadak Bhawan, Outer Ring Road,Delhi
Cantonment ,New-Delhi.
9.
The Commander, 42 Border Road Task
Force(BRTF) Pin-930042, C/o 99 APO
( Headquarters),Arunachal Pradesh.
.. Respondents.
AND
WP(C) No. 154(AP)/2012
1.
Shri Dorjee Khandu
Son of Shri Tsering Dorjee,Village Dirang
P.O. & P.S. Dirang, District West Kameng,
Arunachal Pradesh.
2.
Shri Tsering Dorjee (G.B)
Village Dirang, P.O & P.S. Dirang,
District West Kameng,Arunachal Pradesh.
…………..Petitioners
-Versus1.
The State of Arunachal Pradesh
Represented by the Chief Secretary,
Government of Arunachal Pradesh,
2.
The Commissioner,
Department of Land Management,
Itanagar, Government of Arunachal Pradesh.
3.
The Director,
Department of Land Management,
Government of Arunachal Pradesh.
4.
The Deputy Commissioner,
Bomdila,West Kameng,District,
Arunachal Pradesh.
5.
The Additional Deputy Commissioner,
Dirang Circle,West Kameng District,
Arunachal Pradesh.
6.
5
The Circle Officer,
Dirang Circle,District West kameng,
Arunachal Pradesh.
7.
The Compensation Board to assess
and prepare valuation reports of various
horticultural crops,agricultural lands and
undeveloped private lands for Dirang
Circle represented by the Additional
Deputy Commissioner, Dirang Circle,
West Kameng District,Arunachal Pradesh.
8.
The Director General of Border Roads,
Seema Sadak Bhawan, Outer Ring Road, Delhi
Cantonment ,New-Delhi.
9.
The Commander, 42 Border Roads Task
Force (BRTF) Pin-930042, C/o 99 APO
( Headquarters),Arunachal Pradesh.
..Respondents.
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K.MUSAHARY
For the petitioner
:- Mr. Tony Pertin
Mr. K.Saxena
Mr. G.Tsering, Advocates
For the respondents
No. 1 to 7
Mr. R.H.Nabam,Sr. Govt. Advocater
No. 8 and 9
:-Mr. Muk Pertin, Advocate.
Date of hearing
: 18.07.2012.
Date of judgment
: 09.08.2012
6
JUDGMENT AND ORDER( CAV)
These two writ petitions were filed on 18.4.12 and notice of
motion was issued on 19.4.12 by separate orders returnable in 4 weeks
calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why a Rule should not
be issued as prayed for. While issuing
the notice of motion by an
interim order the Respondent No. 4 Deputy Commissioner and
Respondent No. 5 Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Dirang
not to disburse the compensation
12.6.12, The learned
were directed
amount till returnable date, i.e.
Govt. Advocate prayed for and was allowed
3
weeks further time for filing the counter.The State respondents filed no
response
till
17.7.12.
However,
the
In-charge
Addl.
Deputy
Commissioner, Dirang Circle, submitted written instructions/ parawise
comments in connection with W.P.(C) No. 154(AP)/2012 to the senior
Govt. Advocate, who prayed for some more time to file counter
affidavit. Considering the importance and urgency of the matter, as
agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, the matters have been
taken up for hearing. The learned senior Govt. Advocate requested the
court to take the
parawise comments into consideration in disposing
the matters.
2.
Both these petitions involve similar facts and issues pertaining to
evaluation of loss of landed and other properties of the affected people
and payment of compensation. The question of irregularities in
assessing the value of the properties and making overvaluation and
undervaluation of the properties of the affected people have been raised
and , therefore, both the petitions are heard together and are being
disposed of by this common judgment.
3.
I have heard Mr. Tony Pertin, learned counsel for the petitioner
and Mr.R.H.Nabam, learned senior Govt. Advocate for the respondents
No. 1 to 7 and Mr. Muk Pertin, learned CGC for the respondents No. 8
and 9.
4.
A mega Project for construction of 2- lane trans High Way Route
of about 1811 KMs in length linking Tawang in the North Western tip of
Arunachal Pradesh to Kanubari in South Eastern end of the State and
7
finally ending at
NH-52 near Akanjan on the right sIte of Bogi Beel
bridge near Dibrugarh in Assam has been taken up. The Highway,
passing through the midbelt of the State would interconnect 12 out of
total 16 district headquarter towns of the State and would thus provide
improved connectivities to the State capital and important locations of
population
concentration and
economic activities including sites of
major hydroelectirc Power Project. This project also covers the
broadening of Highway into 2- lane Highway from Balipara-ChardwarTawang which passes through Dirang circle in west Kameng district. The
process of construction /improvement of 2-lane Highway
initiated by
acquisitioning
has been
land and properties from inhabitants of
Dirang circle under the Land Acquisition Act, 1874.
5.
It is stated that in order to assess loss and compensation due,
district administration constituted a Compensation Board under the
Chairmanship
of
the
Additional
Deputy
Commissioner,
Dirang,
Respondent No. 5 with 6( six) other members including the Executive
Engineer
(Electrical), Power Department, Dirang Circle Division,.
Horticulture Development Officer, Dirang, Agriculture Development
Officer, Dirang, Range Forest Officer Dirang, Forest Range and a
representative from 97 Road Construction Company ( RCC), GREF.
6.
It is stated that for assessment of various structures, agricultural
lands, undeveloped private lands and horticulture crops falling between
Balipara-Chardwar-Tawang road in Dirang circle, the Compensation
Board made few surveys in association with a handful of local people of
Dirang Circle for compensating the people likely to be affected in the
area. Subsequently
report of such valuation were submitted to the
Boarder Road Organization ( BRO in short).
7.
It has been alleged by the petitioners that there is a lack of
transparency
and flaws in making surveys by the
Compensation
Board. The petitioners claim that they tried to get access to the
valuation report but the district authorities refused to disclose the
information pertaining to valuation of properties and they had to apply
for obtaining information under the Right to Information Act,2005( for
short , R.T.I Act) . After a great effort the petitioners could obtain the
valuation
report prepared by the Compensation Board and from the
said report they could learn that
there are gross irregularities in
8
assessing
the value and denial of actual value of their properties
through fraud and corrupt practices resorted to by the Compensation
Board. The petitioners have given in
details the instances of
irregularities in the assessment and prayed for fresh evaluation of the
properties by a new Board and an inquiry by the Central Bureau of
Investigation ( for short , CBI) to go in to the assessment report of the
Compensation Board and wrongful disbursement of the compensation
amount and frauds committed.
8.
Mr. Nabam, learned Senior Govt. Advocate, strenuously opposing
the demand for CBI inquiry submits that there is no double valuation,
overvaluation or undervaluation of the properties involved and the
grievances of the petitioners could be looked into by
the existing
Compensation Board or a new committee/Board to be constituted
by
the govt. for proper assessment of the properties.
9.
The suggestion of the learned Sr. Govt.Advocate regarding
constitution of a new Committee for correct valuation of the properties
of the affected people including the petitioners has been accepted by
the learned counsel for the petitioners and in this regard necessary
order could be passed without any hesitation. It would be so done at
the subsequent stage of this judgment.
10.
The demand for CBI inquiry has been made by the petitioners by
filing an additional affidavit in WP(C) No. 154(AP)/12. In paragraph 6 of
the said affidavit it is averred that serious anomalies had crept in and
public money has been misused with fraudulent means in the name of
compensation requiring a direction to be issued for conducting inquiry
by an independent agency, preferably by the CBI. This demand for CBI
inquiry cannot be acceded
to by the court in a routine or casual
manner unless the petitioners on the basis of material placed, could
prima facie satisfy that the alleged irregularities , fraud and misuse of
public money have been committed by the concerned authorities or
officials. This court is alive
with the law laid down and the direction
issued by the Apex Court in Secretary, Minor Irrigation and Rural
Engineering Services, U.P and others Vs, Sahngoo Ram Arya and
another, reported in (2002) 5 SCC 521. It is held therein that the
High court must, on the basis of pleadings and materials on record,
prima facie reach a conclusion for directing inquiry by the CBI.
11.
9
It may be noted that the first petition WP(C) 153(AP)/2012
relates to assessment/valuation of house while the second petition
WP(C) 154(AP)/2012 relates to assessment/ valuation of landed
properties of the petitioners and other people of the locality.
12.
I have carefully gone through the averments made in both the
petitions and the materials placed in support of the said averments for
the purpose of coming to a conclusion as to whether the petitioners,
prima-facies, have been able to satisfy the court for ordering CBI
inquiry.
13.
As regard the irregularities in assessing the value of housing
properties in WP(C) No. 153(AP/2012, I have come to the following
conclusions.
(1) In order to compensate
the affected inhabitants the
Government of Arunachal Pradesh, Department of Land Management,
issued notification No. Im-63/2011 (pt) dated 26.11.2011 wherein the
rates for various categories of land and assests were notified for the
purpose of payment of compensation of the land acquired
for the
highway project in the State ( vide Annexure : P/3 to the writ petition)
The following rates were notified for the house structures-
MIBT/ILC(Wooden)/Timber
Rs. 4200/-Sqmtr.
SPT Building Brick ( Walling)
Rs 14200/-Sqmtr
SPT Accra Walling ( Half Brick)
Rs 9200/-Sqmtr
RCC Building
Rs 217800/-Sqmtr
Ordinary Basha Type(OBT) Structure
Rs. 900/-Sqmtr.
(2) The house property as shown in serial no.6 of the valuation
report ( Annexure : P /4 to the writ petition ) situated on BCT road
between 183.037 km to 189.800 km belongs to petitioner No. 1 and it
is shown to be boulder masonry local type wall/ CGI sheet roofing and
as such it has been
valued
at Rs. 14,72,540.00 at the rate of Rs.
14,200/- Sqmtr with the plinth area of 103.70 square meters. Whereas
at serial No. 27 of the aforementioned valuation report, the house
structure of one Rinchin Khandu has been shown as semi permanent
type (S.P Type) and thus valued at Rs. 18,38,616.00 at the rate of Rs.
10
14,200/-Sqmtr with the plinth area of 129.48 square meters. But in a
sharp contrast the photographic evidences speak otherwise
(Vide
Annexure P/5 to the writ petition ). Factually the house structure of the
petitioner No. 1
should have been shown as S.P.Type and that of
Rinchin Khandu’s house as S.P.Type(Accra). It is noted that the rate of
S.P.Type ( Accra) has been valued at Rs. 9,200/- Sq.mtr as per the
notification dated 26.11.2011, but the rate for the house structure of
Rinchin Khandu has been valued at Rs. 14,200/-Sqmtr. Moreover, the
plinth area of the petitioner No. 1 is shown lesser than its actual area
whereas in the case of Rincha Khandu the plinth area is shown much
more than its actual area. Thus it can easily be pointed out that in the
case of petitioner No.1 the house structure has been undervalued and in
the case of Rinchin Khandu the same has been
overvalued due to
reason best known to the Board members.
(3)
In another case as shown at Serial No. 14 of the valuation
report the house property of petitioner No. 2 located on B.C.T. road in
between 167.00 km to 174 km ( vide Annexure P/6 to the writ petition)
has
been shown as “ Semi Permanent Type ( S.P.T), Accra” for the
front part and backyard structure and as such it has been valued at Rs.
9200/-Sqmtrs with a plinth area of 121.36 Sqmtrs and 45.88 Sqmtrs
respectively. Whereas as per the photographic evidence ( vide
Annexure - P/7 to the writ petition) the concerned house structure is
of S.P. Type with a plinth area of much more than the area as shown in
the assessment report. But as per the notified rates the house of
petitioner should be valued @ Rs. 14,200/- Sqmtr instead of Rs.
9,200/-Sq.mtr. Hence the total value of the house structure belonging
to the petitioner No. 2 should have been much higher than the offered
value. Be
that as it may, if the value of the house
structure of
petitioner is calculated @ Rs.14,200/-Sqmtr even without increasing the
plinth area, the value would be more than Rs. 21 Lacs (Rupees twenty
one lacs) instead of the value shown in the report.
(4) Similarly
the
house
structures
of
petitioner
4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15 and 16 are also undervalued
No.
by the
Board in its assessment/valuation report. The plinth are of the
structures as shown in the valuation report are much lesser than the
actual plinth area of the concerned house structure. It can easily be
11
concluded that in the case of petitioners the value of their houses are
made without any proper verification or consultation. The Board simply
took a lump sum value of these structures and surreptiously prepared
the valuation report so as to benefit
the
vested interest. As simple
comparison between the structures of these petitioners with that of
other villagers who have been benefited
by the impugned valuation
report might clarify the factual position. In nutshell, it is clearly made
out that the entire valuation reports are undervalued and/or overvalued
and the same were prepared with intention other than bona fide and on
extraneous considerations.
(5) The gross anomalies in the assessment and disbursement
of the compensation amount can easily be found
at location- KM
173,364 B.C.T. Road, Dirang village for which an
amount of Rs.
23,41,580/- of the public money has been disbursed to some
handpicked/chosen beneficiaries. The house structurs as shown in the
annexure -P/8 colly to writ petition are found to be of Boulder Masonry
local type wall with CGI sheet roof but the compensation Board in its
impugned assessment report classified the structures as SPT brick and
calculated it to be of 164.90 SQM ( Ground Floor +First Floor) whereas
it was a single storey with an area of 57.60 Sqm and hence it is found
to be wrongly overvalued @ Rs. 14,200/- per sqmt with a whopping
amount of Rs. 23,41,580/-.Further, when the case
this court the said structure was
was listed before
reportedly demolished by the
authorities in a hurry so as to conceal their act of fraud and to leave no
proof of its wrong classification. But the photographs of the said area
after the demolition of the structure clearly show that it was never a
two storey structure nor was it standing on a plot covering an area of
more than 60 sqm ( vide Annexure: P/12 colly to the additional affidavit
of the petitioners in WP(C) No. 153(AP)/2012).
(6) Yet another example of gross irregularity is found at
185.556 KM on
report
B.C.T. Road Rama
Camp. As per the assessment
the structure of Sri Tsering has been classified as
S.P Type
single storied and calculated the area to be of 62.50 sqm (ground level)
and as such the property has been undervalued compared to the value
fixed at Rs.9,200/- per Sqmt at the same location. But in a stratling
contrast of the miscalculation of the compensation board the adjacent
12
house belonging to one Shri Passang Ngarey has been shown as 206
sqm. The photographic evidence (Annexure: P/13 colly to the additional
affidavit of the petitioners in W.P.(C) No. 153(AP)/2012) clearly show
that the house of Sri Tsering is much larger than that of Sri Passang
Ngarey. But as per the impugned assessment report the house of Sri
Tsering was undervalued at Rs. 5,75,000/- @9,200/- per sqm and that
of Sri Passang Ngarey was overvalued at Rs.29,25,200/- @14200/- per
sqm.
(7)
The gross anomalies in assessment reports of the
compensation Board can again be seen from the valuation report of
house properties on B.C.T Road in B/W 189 km onwards till 189.490
km. Here, the Board has erroneously classified
many houses as SPT
Type Brick Wall and overvalued them @ Rs. 14,200/- per sqm, whereas
in contrast, the photographic evidence speaks otherwise and shows that
not a single structure of these houses are of SP Type Brick Wall but of
SP Type Accra and should have been valued @Rs.9,200/- per sqm as
per the notified rates and some of the house structures are of OB type
and should have been paid @ Rs. 9,00/- per sqm. Hence, the
photographic evidence and the statements clearly explain the fraud that
has been committed by the Board members while assessing and
classifying the house structures thereby causing huge loss to the public
exchequer. (Annexure: P/13 colly to the additional affidavit of the
petitioners in W.P.(C) No. 153(AP)/2012).
14.
As regards the irregularities in assessing the values of
horticultural/agricultural lands in W.P.(C) No. 154(AP)/2012, I have
come to the following conclusions :(1)
The petitioner No. 1 is the owner of the land having
more than 80 Kiwi-fruit trees as standing horticultural crops in a well
maintained Kiwi garden which is still standing and can be physically
verified. But in the ‘Final horticultural land assessment report in respect
of land acquired under Trans Arunachal Highway Project(Bye Pass)’ as
prepared by the Compensation Board (Annexure : P/3 to the writ
petition ) at Serial No. 3, total No. of Kiwi fruit trees has been shown as
42 only. The factual position of the standing horticultural crops of
petitioner No. 1 is far more than 42 as shown in the final assessment
13
report and as such the value of the horticultural crops of petitioner No.
1 has been undervalued by the Compensation Board in a most arbitrary
manner. The same can easily be seen from the photographic evidence
(Annexure:
P/4 to
the writ petition ) as shown from an aerial view
wherein more than 80 kiwi fruit trees can be seen. Strangely enough
the Compensation Board members who had an opportunity to have spot
verification of the garden/horticultural land could not even make out the
factual position in their report.
(2) Similarly the petitioner No. 2, father of petitioner No. 1,
is the owner of the land attached to the land of petitioner no. 1 having a
larger area than his son. Petitioner No. 2 is , having a garden of Kiwi
fruits in the said plot of land as standing horticultural crop. It is
apparent that the petitioner No. 2, having a larger area than his son, he
is having larger quantity of Kiwi fruit trees i.e. more than 150 trees. But
in the aforementioned final assessment report at Serial No. 5 (Annexure
P/3 to the writ petition) the quantity of horticultural crops is shown to
be of only 89 Nos. of trees. But the photographic evidence speaks
otherwise ( vide Annexure : P/4 to the writ petition). One can clearly
figure out that the quantity of Kiwi trees of petitioner No. 2 is far more
than the quantity of trees shown in the final assessment report. Thus it
is very much evident that the value of the horticultural crops of both
petitioner No. 1 and 2 has been drastically undervalued.
(3)
So also at serial No. 2 of the aforementioned final
assessment report (Annexure P/3 to the writ petition) shows an apple
garden with 70 plants valued at Rs. 13,12,500/-. But the photographs
(Annexure : P/6 colly to writ petition ) of the said plot of land speak in
contrast to the final assessment report. The photographic evidence
clearly shows nothing but a barren and waste land without a single
apple tree on it. This demonstrates that some of the individuals have
been benefited by the Board by enormously overvaluing their waste
lands. Whereas the petitioners, having the genuine and well maintained
Kiwi
gardens,
were
assessed
much
below
the
actual
value
horticultural crops with that of shrubs and bushes over waste lands.
of
14
(4)
Another instance of gross irregularities can be seen at
serial no. 1 (a) and (b) of the final assessment Report (Anneuxre : P/3
to the writ petition). The horticultural land has been shown as apple
garden having 120 plants with estimated age of each plant as 14 years
and valued at Rs. 22,50,000/- at the rate of Rs. 18,750.00 per plant.
But the photographs of the said plots of land show only shrubs and
bushes all over the waste land and not a single standing tree can be
figured out to be that of apple fruit. Moreover, some part of the said
land shows barren
field
with no sign of existence of a single apple
plant tree on it ( vide Annexure – P/5 to the writ petition).
(5)
An enormous anomaly in the valuation reports as
prepared by the Compensation Board can be seen by taking the
example of land belonging to Sri Phurpa Tsering, MLA from 4- Dirang
Assembly Constituency. The land in question owned by Sri
Phurpa
Tsering, MLA, is a barren community land and the same was
donated/gifted to the present private owner i.e. Sri Phurpa Tsering,
present MLA from 4- Dirang Assembly Constituency by the villagers of
Lish village who are the original owners of the said land. Moreover, the
land in question falls on the valley side of the road and as such the
same is not at all
affected by the Trans Arunachal Highway Project
whatsoever and hence it does not fall on the Right of Way (ROW) so as
to compensate the owner. The same could be verified from
assessment report on
the
agricultural land of the Compensation Board
wherein the land in question is shown to be situated at the valley side.
(vide Annexure: P/11 colly and P/13 to the additional affidavit of the
petitioners in W.P. (C) No. 154(AP)/2012). The images of the land in
question taken by the petitioners further elucidate that the same being
situated at valley side cannot be said to be affected by the Trans
Arunachal Highway Project whatsoever. But very surprisingly and
interestingly the same land can be seen in two different valuation
reports; one at Sl. No. 10 in the final assessment of agricultural land
value pertaining to TAH under Dirang Sub- Division (Annexure : P/9 to
the petition and another in the final horticultural crops/land assessment
report in respect of Ch : 183.070 – 194.800 Km at Sl. No. 99 (vide
Annexure: P/14 to the additional affidavit of the petitioners in W.P.(C)
No. 154 (AP)/2012. But the name of the owner of the land in question
15
has been shown as Smt. Norbu Droima W/O Sri Phurpa Tsering in both
the assessment reports and not in the name of Sri Phurpa Tsering to
whom the said plot of land was donated by the community for the
welfare purposes.
(6)
It is clearly made out that Sri Phurpa Tsering, MLA from 4-
Dirang Assembly Constituency, in the name of his wife Smti Norbu
Droima has illegally/ erroneously claimed two different classifications
against the same piece of land which in fact, is a barren land and
thereby
fraudulently gained a huge amount of Rs. 36,87,750/- as
compensation by showing the land in question as agricultural land at
one time and horticultural land on the other wherein as many 165 apple
trees of 13 years of age has been shown as standing crops. It is also
clear that the Compensation Board without surveying the assets and in
total non application of mind prepared false assessment reports
benefiting few handpicked persons depriving the rights and claims of
the actual victims of the project. It is now evident that the petitioners
and other victims of the project were denied their rightful amount of
compensation as per the law.
14.
In view of the above findings, it is beyond doubt that it is a fit
case where a CBI inquiry could be ordered. It is accordingly directed
that the CBI shall make an inquiry into the matter to find out the truth
or otherwise on the alleged irregularities committed by the members of
the Board and other persons including the local MLA within a period of 6
( six) months from the date of receipt of this order. A copy of this order
along with the copy of the writ petitions with annexures appended
thereto shall be furnished to the CBI by the Registry of this court. After
submission of report, the CBI shall take necessary action against the
persons/officials found involved in the commission of irregularities and
fraud in accordance with law.
15.
It is also directed that the Chief Secretary to the Govt. of
Arunachal
Pradesh
(Respondent
No.1)
shall
constitute
a
new
Compensation Board with Deputy Commissioner of West Kameng
District, Bomdila as its Chairman and 3 other responsible Officers of the
rank of Deputy Secretary of the Department of Revenue, Agriculture
16
and P.W.D for correct assessment of valuation of the properties
involved and submit fresh report before the authorities concerned within
a reasonable period preferably within 3 ( three) months from the date
of receipt of a copy of this order.
16.
The Registry shall communicate this order to the CBI authority
and the Chief Secretary to the Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh furnishing
them with copy of the writ petitions including the annexures appended
thereto and the copy of the parawise comments dated 29.6.11
submitted
by
Shri
L.W.Bapu,
C.O,
In-charge
Additional
Deputy
Commissioner,Dirang which was placed before this court at the time of
hearing forthwith.
17.
With the aforesaid observation and direction, petitions stand
disposed of.
JUDGE
ad
17
18