Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Gauhati High Court

National Hydro Electric Power ... vs The National Commission For Scheduled ... on 16 October, 2020

Author: Kalyan Rai Surana

Bench: Kalyan Rai Surana

                                                              Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010089692020




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

                                         WP(C) 8588/2019


         1:NATIONAL HYDRO ELECTRIC POWER CORPORATION LTD. (NHPC)
         A GOVT. OF INDIA UNDERTAKING
          REP. BY THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
          LOWER SUBANSIRI HYDRO ELECTRIC PROJECT
          P.O. AND P.S. GERUKAMUKH
          DIST- DHEMAJI
         ASSAM- 787035


          VERSUS

          1:THE NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR SCHEDULED TRIBES AND ANR.
          REP. BY ITS CHAIRPERSON
          6TH FLOOR
          B WING
          LOK NAYAK BHAWAN
          KHAN MARKET
          NEW DELHI- 110003

          2:KIRI DINI BOGUM
          GENERAL SECY.
          1225 HECTARE COOMPENSATION DEMAND ACTION COMMITTEE
          S/O- TAKIR DINI
          PERMANENT R/O- LIPU VILLAGE
          P.O. AND P.S. LIKABALI
          DIST- LOWER SIANG
          ARUNACHAL PRADESH

          Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P K TIWARI
          Advocate for the Respondent : MR H K DAS
                                                                                      Page No.# 2/2

                                   BEFORE
                   HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

                                            ORDER

Date : 16.10.2020 Heard Mr. P.K. Tiwari, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. R.K.D. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. His argument is concluded, reserving right to reply. He is also granted liberty to file written note of his argument.

Heard Mr. T. Pertin, learned counsel for the respondent no.2. His argument remains inconclusive. He is also at liberty to file a short note of his argument after he concludes.

Mr. S. Sarma, learned CGC appearing for the respondent no.1 is present. He would be heard on the next date.

It may be noted herein that the argument in the matter has commenced with the consent of all sides. It has been submitted that I.A.(Civil) No.1185/2020 has been filed for vacating of the stay operating in this writ petition and it is also mentioned that amongst other grounds, the respondent no.2 herein has raised an issue of jurisdiction of this Court to adjudicate upon the order passed by the National Commission for Schedule Tribes. The said I.A. is not pressed as all the sides have consented for the hearing of this writ petition.

The Court has been called upon to record that the petitioner is restricting his argument on the competence of the National Commission for Schedule Tribes to pass the impugned order, which according to the learned senior counsel for the petitioner is of adjudicatory in nature, which is not envisaged under the provisions of Article 338A of the Constitution of India.

In view of the ensuing puja vacation, the Court is inclined to direct the matter to be listed for further hearing on 17.11.2020.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant