Direct-purchase land compensation must strictly follow the prescribed formula and be disclosed to landowners.

The petitioner, son of Sri Buparam Pachani @ Chutia, claimed an interest in two co-pattadar plots at Deolia Gobindapur Gaon, Lakhimpur, Assam.

Portions of the plots were acquired for the “Construction of Dhakuakhana Butikur to Teliagaon Road under Assam Mala Project” through direct purchase by negotiated settlement under the State Government’s Scheme notified on 20.01.2021.

Agreements were executed by the pattadars on 05.04.2022, recording compensation of Rs. 48,732/- for 4 lessas from Dag No. 919 and Rs. 16,05,323.83 for 19 lessas from Dag No. 911.

The petitioner subsequently discovered that a house standing on Dag No. 919 had not been included in the zirat compensation, which initially covered only ten banana trees.

Following representations and hearings in 2025, the authorities conducted a joint verification and valued the house at Rs. 1,30,254/-, describing it as an Assam Type Building rather than an RCC structure.

After adding solatium, 25% additional compensation and 12% interest, the authorities stated that Rs. 3,41,265/- was payable for the structure, but the amount had not been disbursed because the landowners had not submitted the required documents.

The petitioner challenged the non-assessment/non-disclosure of the structure compensation and the absence of a compensation statement showing how the amount had been calculated.

1. Whether the landowners were entitled to compensation for the house standing on the acquired portion of Dag No. 919, notwithstanding its omission from the original zirat compensation assessment.

2. Whether the authorities were required to disclose a compensation statement showing calculation of the structure compensation strictly in accordance with the Direct Purchase Price formula under the Scheme.

3. Whether non-disclosure of the basis of valuation and compensation violated the landowners’ constitutional right to property under Article 300A of the Constitution.

The Court applied the Assam Government Scheme, “Land Acquisition through Direct Purchase by way of Negotiated Settlement,” notified on 20.01.2021, under which the authorities must jointly inspect and measure the land and immovable assets, prepare valuation particulars, and conduct pre-informed negotiations with the landowners.

Under Step 9 and Clause 5 of Annexure-3, the Direct Purchase Price must be calculated in accordance with Sections 26–30 and Schedule I of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, including valuation of immovable assets and a 25% incentive inclusive of rehabilitation and relief benefits.

The Court further applied Article 300A of the Constitution, holding that the statutory and executive acquisition process must be transparent and that a landowner is entitled to know the basis and computation of compensation for acquired land and structures.

The Court found that the house on Dag No. 919 was an immovable asset attached to the acquired land and therefore had to be included in the valuation under the Scheme.

Although the authorities ultimately assessed the structure at Rs. 1,30,254/- and proposed a final amount of Rs. 3,41,265/- after applying the relevant additions, they had not disclosed to the landowners a compensation statement demonstrating that the amount had been calculated strictly under the Annexure-3 formula.

The Court held that the Scheme contemplated pre-informed negotiation, which necessarily required disclosure of the valuation and computation.

The unexplained omission of the house from the original assessment and the failure to provide the calculation deprived the landowners of meaningful information concerning compensation and was inconsistent with the protection guaranteed by Article 300A.

If the formula-based statement showed a higher amount, the additional amount was also to be paid.

The entire process was directed to be completed within three months from submission of a certified copy of the order.

The landowners could accept Rs. 3,41,265/- under protest and pursue an appropriate legal remedy if aggrieved by the final assessment.

No order as to costs was made.