The Jharkhand High Court directly disposed of a writ petition seeking payment of interest on land acquisition compensation after the concerned bank admitted the interest was due and undertook to disburse the amount within a specified period, reaffirming existing procedure; serves as precedent for summary disposal when respondent admits liability and makes a binding representation.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WPC/475/2024 of BANKIM CHANDRA GIRI Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND |
| CNR | JHHC010025952024 |
| Date of Registration | 29-01-2024 |
| Decision Date | 10-09-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | Disposed Off |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR |
| Court | High Court of Jharkhand |
| Precedent Value | Illustrative binding authority on disposal as infructuous upon respondent’s unconditional undertaking |
| Questions of Law | Whether a writ petition seeking interest on awarded land acquisition compensation is maintainable when the disbursing bank admits liability and agrees to pay. |
| Ratio Decidendi | When the respondent bank accepts the factual liability for the outstanding interest on land acquisition compensation and provides an explicit written undertaking to pay the same within a specified period, the writ petition becomes infructuous. Thus, no further adjudication is necessary, and the proceedings may be disposed of accepting such commitment. |
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court | The Court relied on the unconditional written statement (counter affidavit) of the bank confirming the amount owed and the specific timeframe for payment, finding this sufficient to dispose of the matter as infructuous. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | Petitioners claimed unpaid interest on land acquisition award; Bank (respondent) accepted via counter affidavit liability and undertook to pay within two weeks. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts in Jharkhand, public authorities, and similar writ matters in the jurisdiction. |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts and tribunals considering similar factual admissions by responding authorities. |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- When a respondent authority (such as a bank) admits liability for a monetary claim in its counter affidavit before the High Court and undertakes to make payment within a given period, the Court may dispose of the petition as infructuous without entering into the merits.
- Lawyers drafting or defending against similar writs should consider that explicit admissions and undertakings by respondents can obviate the need for prolonged litigation.
- Ensuring a detailed, written assurance with a specified timeframe enhances judicial efficiency and quickens relief for petitioners.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court noted the petition sought a direction for payment of interest on an awarded compensation sum under land acquisition, kept with the respondent Bank.
- On perusal of the Bank’s counter affidavit, the Court observed that while the principal compensation had been paid, the interest portion remained pending.
- The Bank’s counter affidavit explicitly acknowledged the precise amount due as interest (Rs. 87,149.21) and undertook to release this sum to the petitioners within two weeks.
- Relying on this clear admission and undertaking, the Court concluded that nothing further survived for adjudication.
- Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of as infructuous, with the Court accepting the Bank’s assurance.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner:
- Sought a writ directing the Bank to pay the interest owed on the awarded compensation amount.
Respondent (Bank):
- Stated in its counter affidavit that the principal compensation had already been paid.
- Admitted that the interest amount of Rs. 87,149.21 remained pending.
- Undertook to disburse the interest amount within two weeks.
State:
- No substantive argument recorded in the judgment.
Factual Background
The petitioners, landholders from East Singhbhum, sought payment of interest on compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. Though the principal sum was already disbursed, interest remained unpaid by the respondent Bank of India, Gopalpur Branch. During the proceedings, the Bank submitted a counter affidavit confirming the interest amount due and undertook to pay it to the petitioners within two weeks, leading the Court to dispose of the writ as infructuous.
Statutory Analysis
No statutory interpretation of substantive law or constitutional provision was conducted in the judgment. The ruling was based solely on the factual acknowledgment and undertaking of payment by the disbursing authority.
Procedural Innovations
- The Court accepted and recorded the respondent bank’s written admission and time-bound payment undertaking as sufficient ground for disposing of the writ without further hearing or reservation.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The judgment follows established principles regarding disposal of writ petitions rendered infructuous by respondent’s admission and assurance.