The Darjeeling district and session’s court today revoked the stay order it had passed earlier over the disputed farmland in Jamuney and re-imposed Section 144 of the CRPC till further proceedings.
A plot of 13.8 acres in Jamuney, 20km from Darjeeling town, is embroiled in controversy. The Gorkhaland Territorial Administration is developing the area as a tourist spot, but the land owners have lodged a complaint stating their property has been forcibly acquired by the council without adequately compensating them.
Acting on the complaint of the nine land losers, the district administration on April 28 imposed Section 144 at the site halting all ongoing works of the GTA. Countering the prohibitory order, the GTA filed a revision petition on May 28 at the court, which was upheld and a stay order passed.
The district and session’s court today ruled that the revision filed by the GTA seeking to challenge the authority of the district administration to impose Section 144 on a statutory body had no locus standi.
“We challenged the locus standi of the revision filed by the GTA. Our contention is that Section 144 imposed by the district administration was for the land losers and not against any government agency or statutory body. Since the appellants did not have a locus standi, district and session’s judge Uday Kumar Yadav ruled in our favour,” said Public Prosecutor Pranay Rai.
Rai also noted the GTA is part and parcel of the state government and the district administration has every right to promulgate Section 144 of the CRPC. “The prohibitory order could likely remain in place for six months depending on the proceedings of the case,” he said.
Source: EOI
 |
| Jamuney |
Acting on the complaint of the nine land losers, the district administration on April 28 imposed Section 144 at the site halting all ongoing works of the GTA. Countering the prohibitory order, the GTA filed a revision petition on May 28 at the court, which was upheld and a stay order passed.
The district and session’s court today ruled that the revision filed by the GTA seeking to challenge the authority of the district administration to impose Section 144 on a statutory body had no locus standi.
“We challenged the locus standi of the revision filed by the GTA. Our contention is that Section 144 imposed by the district administration was for the land losers and not against any government agency or statutory body. Since the appellants did not have a locus standi, district and session’s judge Uday Kumar Yadav ruled in our favour,” said Public Prosecutor Pranay Rai.
Rai also noted the GTA is part and parcel of the state government and the district administration has every right to promulgate Section 144 of the CRPC. “The prohibitory order could likely remain in place for six months depending on the proceedings of the case,” he said.
Source: EOI
Post a Comment