The state government of Gauhati has been directed by the Gauhati High Court to pay a compensation of Rs. 5 lakhs to the daughter of a man who was killed by the police when he was participating in the Assam movement on 30.11.1981.

A single judge bench of Justice Devashis Baruah disposed of a Petition seeking a direction upon the concerned Respondent Authorities for payment of the ex-gratia compensation of Rs.5 lakhs under the Government of Assam to the martyrs family.

The Petitioner is the daughter of Late Loknath Saikia who was killed by the police when he was participating in the Assam movement on 30.11.1981. The Petitioner on coming to learn about the said ex-gratia compensation scheme of the Government of Assam applied for the said grant of Rs. 5 lakhs but the same was refused on the ground that the said amount have been already disbursed to the Respondent No. 4 (brother of Petitioner’s father) . It is under such circumstances that the instant petition has been filed. The Petitioner in the said petition have enclosed the certificate issued by Additional Deputy Magistrate, Nagaon dated 13.08.2017 issued in pursuance to Rule 2(a) of the Assam Public Service (Preferential Appointment) Rules, 1999 certifying that her father was killed in connection with the participation in the Assam movement on the problems of foreigners .

Pursuant to the filing of the petition, the Respondent No. 4 had filed an affidavit-in-opposition, wherein 6 he had duly admitted that he had received the said amount of Rs. 5 lakhs and further that he never made any claim for the said amount. It was further mentioned by the Respondent No. 4 in his affidavit that the Petitioner’s mother got married with another person immediately after the demise of the brother of the Respondent No.4 and the Petitioner also went with her mother before the grant of the additional exgratia amount of Rs. 5 lakhs by the authority. It was also mentioned in the said affidavit that out of the amount of Rs. 5 lakhs so received in the month of December, 2016, the Respondent No. 4 constructed a monument in memory of his brother in the courtyard of the Respondent’s house by spending an amount of Rs. 2 lakhs and further donated an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- for the development of Temple on 01.02.2017. Further to that, an amount of Rs.10,000/- was donated for development of a temple in the month of February, 2017.

The Petitioner filed an affidavit-in-reply to the affidavit-n-opposition denying the contents of the said affidavit-in-opposition and stating inter alia that the amount so paid and/or donated is nothing but absurd and without the knowledge of the Petitioner.

The Bench noted that the affidavit-in-opposition was filed by the Respondent No. 1 (State Government) through the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Assam, Implementation of Assam Accord Department. In the said affidavit-inopposition, it was mentioned that the payment was made to the Respondent No. 4 on the basis of a report dated 25.11.2016 received from the Respondent No. 2 (Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon) . It was further mentioned that the payment was made to the Respondent No. 4 through the RTGS but later on 27.12.2016, a Communication was received from the Respondent No. 2 stating the name of the Petitioner as the next of the kin of Late Loknath Saikia. It was further stated that since the amount of exgratia was already paid to the Respondent No. 4, the question of payment to another beneficiary did not arise.

The Court also finds in a Communication dated 25.11.2016 issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon whereby the list of NOKs of the martyrs of Assam falling under Nagaon District was enclosed. The list upon being perused reveals that against the martyr , the name of the Respondent No. 4 was shown alongwith his address, mobile number and bank account details.In a Communication dated 27.12.2016 a month’s later issued by the same Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon to the Joint Secretary to the Govt. Assam intimating the names of various next of kins of the martyrs of Assam agitation falling under Nagaon District whose ex-gratia sanction amount sanctioned/Momento have not been received by the next of kin concerned for the reasons shown against their names. The list enclosed upon being perused reveals that as regards the martyr , the name of the Petitioner was shown as a daughter along with his bank details and in the remarks column, it was mentioned as “NOK changed”.

The Court had taken up the matter on 12.10.2023 and on that day the Court sought for certain instructions from the District Commissioner, Nagaon as to under what basis the Respondent No. 4 was paid the ex-gratia amount. The Court also sought for the instructions as to whether the payment was made on the basis of the next of kin certificate produced by the Respondent No. 4 and if so, the said details may be mentioned in the affidavit to be filed by the District Commissioner, Nagaon. This Court further enquired with the District Commissioner, Nagaon as to what steps the said authority would take if the amount of ex-gratia is paid to the wrong beneficiary.\

On 16.11.2023 , Government Advocate has placed before the Court the instructions as sought for vide the order dated 12.10.2023. From the said instructions, it reveals that the martyr was killed in the Assam Agitation 83 on 30.11.1981. It was further mentioned that the Circle Officer, Samaguri Revenue Circle has reported that the wife of the martyr was appointed in a Government job and she got married and used to reside at her second matrimonial home. It was further mentioned that there was no Communication between the wife of the Martyr and other family members of the Martyr. Further to that, it was also mentioned that in order to pay tribute to the martyrs who sacrificed their life during the Assam movement “Shraddhanjali Programme” was organized centrally by the Implementation of the Assam Accord Department, Government of Assam on 10.12.2016 at to honour the families of the martyrs and extend financial assistance to them. Accordingly, the Principal Secretary, Govt. of Assam, Implementation of Assam Accord Department issued a letter to the Respondent No. 4 to attend the said meeting and accordingly Rs.5 lakhs was sanctioned in his favour as additional ex-gratia grant to the martyrs family. It was also mentioned that no next of kin certificate was issued in the name of the Respondent No. 4 by the District Authority as heirs of Late Loknath Saikia. The said instructions dated 02.11.2023 which have been furnished before the Court.

It was submitted at the bar by the counsels appearing on behalf of the Respondent Department that the said ex-gratia amount is being paid on the basis of next of kin certificate issued by the Office of the Deputy Commissioner.

From the facts narrated , the Bench noted that the Respondent No. 4 was paid the ex-gratia amount by the Respondent Authorities on its own accord without the next of kin certificate being produced and the amount was disbursed to the Respondent No. 4 at the own volition of the Respondent Authorities. However, the entitlement in respect to the said amount was of the Petitioner who admittedly is the daughter of the Martyr.

Under such circumstances, the Court opined that the Respondent Authorities cannot deprive the Petitioner of the grant of ex-gratia amount of Rs.5 lakhs on account of their fault of disbursing the said amount wrongfully to the Respondent No. 4.

The Gauhati High Court disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed being aggrieved by the constitution of a construction committee as per the Notification dated 12.06.2023 of the Deputy Commissioner Karimganj.  

The petitioners are aggrieved to the extent that the Member Secretary-cum Technical Member Abdul Laise Mazumder, Assistant Engineer is not eligible to be appointed as the Member Secretary, in view of the guidelines under the name Asom Adarsha Gram Yojana, wherein the constitution of the committee is prescribed under Clause IV.7.

As per Clause IV.7 the Member Secretary should be either a school teacher or any government servant living in the village. It is stated that Abdul Laize Mazumder is not living in the village concerned and, therefore, it is claimed that although he can be appointed as a technical   member, but he cannot be appointed as a member secretary.

Being aggrieved, the petitioners have submitted a representation dated 19.06.2023 before the Deputy Commissioner, Karimganj. 

As the representation is submitted only on 19.06.2023 and the writ petition is moved on 30.06.2023, the High Court requires the Deputy Commissioner Karimganj to take note of the representation and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law.  

The Deputy Commissioner, Karimganj may pass a reasoned order within 15 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order, the Court directed.

The Division Bench of Justice Achintya Malla Bujor Barua and Justice Devashis Baruah clarified that it has not given any observation on the merit of the claim of the petitioners and it is for the Deputy Commissioner to pass any appropriate order as per its merit.

The Gauhati High Court closed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed seeking direction to the respondents for monitoring the progress and timely completion of works relating to schemes of drinking water supply under the Swachh Bharat Mission in the State of Nagaland, particularly, Phek district.   

The petitioner has annexed various sanction letters with the  petition and alleges that though the works were sanctioned way back in the year 2013, 2014 and 2015, the same have not been completed.   

The respondents have filed affidavit-in-opposition wherein pertinent assertion is made that the schemes in question are not being offered under the Swachh Bharat Mission but the same were sanctioned under the National Rural Drinking Water Programme. It is further asserted that the amounts as indicated in the writ petition were sanctioned during the financial years 2014-2018 under the Swachh Bharat Mission and that the same were allocated to the respective districts of the State of Nagaland for implementation of programmes under the Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) to improve the levels of cleanliness in rural areas through Solid and Liquid Waste Management activities and to make the Gram Panchayats Open Defecation Free.  

Regarding the issues of projects pertaining to drinking water, it has been stated that the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation sanctioned amounts of Rs.113.08 lakhs and Rs.350.00 lakhs, respectively as grants-in-aid in the State of Nagaland in the year 2013-2014 which has been allocated to different villages and works are under progress. However, one project in the village Leshemi was damaged by unknown miscreants on 26.06.2020 and an enquiry is being undertaken. It is further stated that in the year 2017-2018, a sum of Rs.7,90,08,300/- was sanctioned by the Ministry of Drinking Water & Sanitation as grants-in-aid for various villages and the projects are nearing completion. In affirmation of the fact that the projects are being sincerely executed, various photographs have been annexed with the affidavit-in-opposition.  

The Division Bench of Chief Justice  Sandeep Mehta  and Justice Devashis Baruah find that the averments made in the affidavit-in-opposition negate the apprehensions raised by the petitioner in the petition. Though an affidavitin-reply has been filed by the petitioner, nothing significant has been stated therein which can persuade the Court to discard the averments made in the affidavit of the respondents that the projects/schemes are being implemented in all sincerity.

Hence, the Court is of the view that no further directions are required to be given to the respondents in this PIL and, thus, the same is closed.

The Gauhati High Court disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed raising a grievance that the proposed National Highway 17 is to pass through their respective villages, which might disrupt their lives and virtually destroy their habitat.

The PIL stated that proceedings under Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956 have already been initiated with the issuance of Notifications dated 10.03.2023; 20.01.2023 and 28.02.2023.

The petitioners claim that they have filed objections under Section 3C of the 1956 Act. The only submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners before the Court is that the National Highway Authorities may be directed to consider such objections as per law.

C. Baruah, standing counsel, National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) and R.K. Talukdar, standing counsel, National Highways & Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd (NHIDCL) have not disputed the fact that the representation/objection filed by the petitioners under Section 3C of the 1956 Act has to be considered as per the mandate of the said Act.

Thus, requiring the respondent authorities to objectively consider the representation dated 12.04.2023 filed by the petitioners in the letter and spirit of the provisions of the Act of 1956, the instant petition is disposed of by the Division Bench of Chief Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Devashis Baruah .

The state government of Assam has apprised the Gauhati High Court that it has constituted Public Land Protection Cells (PLPC) for rural areas, municipal areas as well as for Guwahati Metropolitan area in order to redress grievances relating to encroachment of pasture land, catchment areas, ponds, rivers, lakes, public places, burial grounds etc.

The Division Bench of Chief Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Devashis Baruah disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) alleging that certain individuals have illegally encroached on a plot of Government land ad measuring lechas in the Sutirpur village of Nagaon district which was in possession of the Water Resource Department since the year 1955-56.

The Court, vide order dated 15.05.2023 passed in this PIL, directed to provide copy of the order dated 02.03.2023 passed in PIL of 2018 to Advocate General, Assam and also to transmit to the Chief Secretary, Government of Assam, for issuing necessary instruction to the State authorities for formation of Public Land Protection Cells (PLPC) in each district .

N. Bordoloi, Standing counsel Revenue and Disaster Management Department, has placed before the Court a communication dated 25.05.2023 issued by the Joint Secretary to the Government of Assam, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, indicating that in terms of the direction of this Court, the Government of Assam, vide Notification dated 24.05.2023, has constituted Public Land Protection Cells (PLPC) for rural areas, municipal areas as well as for Guwahati Metropolitan area in order to redress grievances relating to encroachment of pasture land, catchment areas, ponds, rivers, lakes, public places, burial grounds etc.

In view of above development, the High Court feel that since the issues sought to be agitated through this writ petition before this Court involve multiple factual aspects relating to encroachment upon Government land, the petitioners are required to approach the PLPC concerned constituted vide Notification dated 24th May, 2023 by filing representation for ventilating their grievances set out in the petition.

“Upon receiving such representation, the PLPC concerned shall consider the same objectively after providing opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and pass a reasoned order thereupon as per law.

In case the grievance raised by the petitioners is found to be justified, appropriate steps be taken to remove the encroachments. The exercise as directed above shall be completed within 6 (six) months from the date of submission of the representation”, the order reads.

The Gauhati High Court has directed the Union of India and state authorities to make adequate stock of the Anti-retroviral drug available at all times.

The Kohima Songkhupchung Serto, Justice Devashis Baruah disposed of a PIL to espouse the grievances of people living with HIV in the state of Nagaland in respect of the non-availability of Anti-retroviral drug at one point of time.

N. Mozhui, counsel appearing for the Project Director, Nagaland State AIDS Control Society (respondent No.4)  submitted  that at no point of time there has been shortage of Anti-retroviral drug in the State.

He added that however it may so happen that sometimes at a particular station because of the sudden rise in the number of people living with HIV or people infected with HIV, the stock may have fallen short of the requirement but it is always met by taking from other stations which is eventually replenished when supply comes.

The State authorities are aware of the requirement of the medicine in the State and therefore, all efforts are always made at all times to see that the stock is maintained. In support of this statement, Mozhui submitted  that he also has the latest information from respondent No.4 that stock of the medicine is available at all the stations.

Kikru Pfukha, counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the respondents may be directed to make the medicine available at all times.

Considering the submissions of both the counsels for the parties, the Court is  of the view that the PIL can be disposed of with a direction that the respondents should make adequate stock of the Anti-retroviral drug available at all times. Accordingly, the PIL is disposed of with the direction that the respondents should make the required stock of Anti-retroviral drug available at all times.