After nearly a decade of legal uncertainty, the High Court of Meghalaya has finally brought closure to a long-standing land compensation dispute. In a significant ruling delivered on July 23, 2025, a division bench headed by Chief Justice IP Mukerji and Justice W Diengdoh directed the state government to release land compensation funds that had been withheld for several years.
The case dates back to 2016 and originated from a public interest litigation (PIL) concerning alleged irregularities in compensation awarded for land acquisition. The matter became controversial after the Supreme Court, in a 2017 order, expressed serious concern about the high rate of compensation — ₹115 per square foot — which was significantly higher than the rate at which the land was originally purchased. The apex court had raised suspicions of misuse of public money and directed that payments to two individuals, Patricia Nongsiej and Stied Dkhar, be put on hold pending further investigation.
In compliance with the Supreme Court’s directive, a Special Judicial Officer was appointed to examine whether the compensation amount was reasonable and in accordance with legal provisions. After a detailed inquiry, the officer submitted her judgment on June 20, 2025, concluding that the compensation was fairly assessed. The officer stated that it was in line with Section 26 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
During the final hearing, the High Court acknowledged that the original landowner had already received 80 per cent of the total compensation. The remaining 20 per cent had been held back due to objections raised by other parties who claimed rightful shares in the land. Senior Advocate K. Paul appeared for the original landowner, arguing for the release of the balance payment.
Chief Justice Mukerji clarified that since the case was filed as a PIL and not under the specific dispute resolution mechanisms of the Land Acquisition Act, the Special Judicial Officer’s report should be treated as a final judgment. He also said that any party unhappy with the judgment has the legal right to challenge it through proper legal procedures.
The court ordered that the remaining 20 per cent of the compensation should continue to be held for another eight weeks. If no opposing orders are issued within that period, the money will be released to the transferor. “Any party aggrieved by the judgment or any part of it shall be at liberty to take steps in accordance with law,” the bench said in its order.