Ochaman Ali vs The Union Of India And 7 Ors

Page No.# 1 / 5

GAHC010033182025



2026:GAU-AS:13606



THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WP(C)/994/2025

OCHAMAN ALI
S/O- NAIB ALI, R/O- VILLAGE GOTAIMARI, P.O.- NANDIKESWAR, P.S.
JAMUGURI, DISTRICT- SONITPUR, ASSAM, PIN CODE- 784180
VERSUS

THE UNION OF INDIA AND 7 ORS
THROUGH THE SECRETARY, TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF
ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS, TRANSPORT BHAWAN, 1,
PARLIAMENT STREET, NEW DELHI- 110001

2:NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION LTD
1ST AND 2ND FLOOR
TOWER A
WORLD TRADE CENTRE
NAUROJI NAGAR
NEW DELHI- 110029

3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
SONITPUR
TEZPUR
DISTRICT- SONITPUR
ASSAM
PIN CODE- 784001

4:THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
SONITPUR
TEZPUR
DISTRICT- SONITPUR
ASSAM
PIN CODE- 784001

5:GENERAL MANAGER

Page No.# 2 / 5

NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION LTD
NH 37
NIKAMUL CHARIALI
NEAR DON BOSCO HR SECONDARY SCHOOL
TEZPUR
PIN CODE- 784154
DISTRICT- SONITPUR
ASSAM

6:THE CIRCLE OFFICER
NADUAR REVENUE CIRCLE
P.O. AND P.S. DISTRICT- SONITPUR
ASSAM

7:PINAKI DEKA
LAT MANDAL
NADUAR REVENUE CIRCLE
DISTRICT- SONITPUR
ASSAM

8:GOPAL CHETRY
S/O- LATE KHARGA BAHADUR CHETRY GAON PRADHAN
VILLAGE- GOTAIMARI
DISTRICT- SONITPUR
ASSA

Advocate for the Petitioner : MD. I HUSSAIN,

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, DY.S.G.I.,SC, NHIDC

BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
JUDGMENT
Date : 14-09-2026
Heard Mr. I. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner; Ms. R. Bora,
learned Central Government Counsel & Standing Counsel, NHIDCL for the
respondent nos. 1, 2 & 5; and Mr. B.J. Talukdar, learned Senior Counsel assisted
by Mr. P.K. Medhi, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the
respondent no. 3, 4 & 6.

Page No.# 3 / 5

2. In this writ petition, the petitioner has projected that he is in possession
of an area of land which is under Government Dag no. 194 situate at Revenue
Village – Gotaimari, Mouza – Silabandha, Naduar Revenue Circle, District –
Sonitpur, Assam. The petitioner has stated that in the said plot of land, the
petitioner has constructed his house and other structures / zirats. It is the
contention of the petitioner that the respondent authorities in the Central
Government and the National Highway Infrastructure Development Corporation
Limited [NHIDCL] had initiated a process of land acquisition to execute a project
: Construction of Jia Bharali Bridge including approaches in a length of 1.948 kms
and also the construction of River Training works in a length of 23.448 kms [‘the
Project’, for short] as per the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956. The
petitioner has contended that the house and structures/zirat standing on the
petitioner’s plot of land were acquired by the respondent authorities for the
purpose of the Project after carrying out surveys and the petitioner was made to
submit prescribed forms for receipt of compensation. It is contended that when
despite acquisition of the petitioner’s plot of land, no compensation is found to
have been released to the petitioner, the petitioner has to approach this Court by
the instant writ petition.
3. It is the contention of the petitioner that in the list of beneficiaries, the
names of a number of who reside in plots of land adjacent to the petitioner’s plot
of land, persons were included, but the petitioner’s name was not found in the
list of beneficiaries to receive compensation amount in the land acquisition
process undertaken under the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956
[‘the Act’, for short]
4. In the affidavit-in-opposition filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 1, 2 &
5, it is stated that the land acquisition process was undertaken for acquisition of
an area of land measuring 151.463 hectares and the Additional District
Commissioner, Sonitpur was appointed as the Competent Authority for Land
Acquisition [CALA]. Notifications under Section 3A of the Act were published on
17.10.2019 and other subsequent dates respectively. The following table had
indicated the sequence of events regarding issuance of the Notifications under
Section 3A and Section 3D respectively :-

Page No.# 4 / 5


3A and date Area [in Ha] 3D and date Area [in Ha] Amount
deposited by
NHIDCL
S.O. 3756[E] dtd
115.037 SO-1289[E]
112.020
17.10.2019
22.04.2020


SO 3081[E] dated
0.261

09.09.2020

SO[E] 1529 dtd
4.147 SO 3081 [E] dated
4.147

20.05.2020
09.09.2020

SO-3959 [E] dtd
3.328 SO 4728[E] dated
3.328

03.11.2020
28.12.2020

SO-3793[E] dtd
22.240 SO-4397[E] dated
22.240
160.03 Cr.
23.10.2020
04.12.2020

SO-3793[E] dtd
0.144

23.10.2021
SO 3189[E] dated
5.432
09.08.2021
SO-1191[E] dtd
5.288
12.03.2021
SO-2197[E] dtd
4.035 SO 2952[E] dated
4.035
17.05.2023
05.07.2023
Total 154.220 151.463

5. As per the affidavit-in-opposition, the areas within Dag no. 194 was not
notified in any of the Notifications under Section 3A and Section 3D of the Act by
the CALA. The stand has been taken to the effect that the areas under Dag no.
194 was not included as it did not fall inside the Right of Way for the Project. It
is specifically mentioned that the plot of land in respect of which the petitioner
has claimed compensation is not affected by the construction of the Project.
6. The areas under Dag no. 194 is a Government land. In the list of
beneficiaries, annexed as Annexure-7 to the writ petition, it is noticed that none
of the beneficiaries has land within Government Dag no. 194. A person in
occupation of Government land would, at best, entitled to zirat compensation.
Except making an averment that survey has been done of the house and

Page No.# 5 / 5

structures standing on the plot of land under occupation of the petitioner within
Government Dag no. 194, no averment has been made that it has been affected
in any manner in the land acquisition process undertaken for the Process under
reference.
7. As no area of land under Government Dag no. 194, more particularly, the
plot of land stated to be under occupation of the petitioner within Government
Dag no. 194 was brought into the purview of the land acquisition process for the
Project under reference, no case is made out for the petitioner to receive any
kind of compensation under the provisions of the National Highways Act.
Therefore, the writ petition is found to be bereft of any merit and the same is
liable to be dismissed. It is accordingly dismissed. No cost.


JUDGE
Comparing Assistant