Serial No. of Order_ 3. 27 .7 .200 0.8.2004 25.8.200 lN THE HIGH COUFtT OF SIKKIM OF]DEF] SHEET Writ Petition BIRKln BAmDUR Versus STATE OF SIKZCIM Order with Signature ...„ .......... No.1# of 200 4 &..?\NR... Petitioner / Appellant Bespondent As requested. put up this case on 10.8.2004 for admission. ( R. K. B# , Cinief Justice '!: CLLi- singh ) Judge As requested by Shri a. Majurrdar.. Counsel for the petitioner, put up on 25.8.2004 for admission to enable him to get. instructions. . ( R. K. Pr# Chief Justice • N.::# QJJ-. sf=) e put up tomorrow for a'dm:i,ssion...-. R. K. Per) Chief Justice 1 Otfice Note as to action (if any) taken on Order `-i 1al Date Order with Signa`ture Office Note as to of of |EE Jer Order \ 26 8.2004 We have heard Shri S..Majumdar, learned --- `,•\,\,?~Jt counsel for the petitioners and Shri S.P.Wangdi, learned Advocate General for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4. 2. On the basis of No±ificati.on No.45/2018/LR|s) dated 22.2.1999 (Annexure P-3), issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the State Government acquired lands mentioned therein for construction of work of 510 MW Teesta Hydroelectric ELroj±gt_ Sia±e |£Le5z NHPQ_Lirni.ted... _ The. pe.titioners allegation in the writ petition is that botri of them are recorded tenants (vide ROR at Annexure Pl and P2) under the respondent Nos. .6 and 7 and the lands . under those two RORs are the subject matter of acquisition in the aforesaid notirication. According to them, both of them being tenants in respect of the lands in question have interest therein and were entitled to be noticed under Section 9(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, but the Land Acquisition Collector, without giving any notice to them, proceeded to make the award. Because of non-issue of notice to them, they were deprived of the+ right to file their objection. The I,and Acquisition. Collector determined compensation and .awarded the same in favour of respondents 6 and 7, by wrongfully depriving the • , + -- + petitioners their legitimate. right to receive compensation. 3. In these circ.um§tances, the petitioners pray that the Land Acquisition Collector (respondent No.4) imay be directed to issue notice to them and decide their share of compensation. In the additional affidavit filed by the. i.ci,:j':.`.`.irl€`+`-tR-r=..T=?:``,i.+r/{:````-1.+-.|T9ri-.--'--L'..I,±Tt-.rtai I SerialNo.ofOrder |oDr°:fteer Order with Signature Office Note as toaction(ifany)takenonOrder 1%thed##AC`C:anl`-o`€}.9.bL{16 i petitioners on 25.8.2004, they have stated that the petitioner No.1 has filed a representation dated 11.6.2003 to the Collector, Ea`st District (respondent No.4) stating that he has interest in the land and is entitled to receive compensation. He has also filed another representation to the Additional District Magistrate of the East District making the same grievance. Those representations are marked as Annexure P4 and P5 to the additional affidavit. Counsel for the I petitioners submits that no decision has yet 11 be en communicated to them on the I( IIIIII representationjf 4. Admittedly, the Collector has already made the award. It is also admitted by the petitioners in paragraph 1 1 of the writ petition that the respondent Nos.6 and 7 have received the awarded amount. 5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the Collector - respondent No.4 to consider the said representations, if pending, and communicate his decision to the petitioner No.1 as expeditiously as possible preferably within two months hence. 6. With the above observation and direction, the I writ petition is disposed of. I 7. Registry is directed to send to the collector, East District copy of the additional affidavit filed by the petitioners together with enclosures along with a copy III)) of this order. ( R. K. Pcu:ra ) Chieif rfustiee