Earlier than the highest court docket, the Union authorities and the State of Mizoram argued that the petition ought to be dismissed as a result of it challenged actions taken practically six many years earlier.
The Supreme Courtroom, nevertheless, determined to look at the case on deserves, regardless of the delay.
The Courtroom stated delay alone can not bar a petition below Article 32 (enabling litigants to strategy the Supreme Courtroom for the enforcement of elementary rights) of the Structure if the delay is defined.
Nonetheless, after inspecting the file, the Courtroom concluded that the Council had failed to determine that the Mizo chiefs possessed absolute possession over the land.
The Bench famous that the fabric relied upon by the Council consisted largely of historic writings and scholarly accounts, which didn’t conclusively show proprietary title. The out there boundary papers and data from the British administration additionally didn’t point out that the chiefs held the land as personal house owners.
Thus, within the absence of proof of possession, the Courtroom held that the declare that the State had disadvantaged the chiefs of property with out compensation couldn’t be sustained.
The court docket additionally rejected the argument that the compensation paid below the 1954 legislation was “illusory”. It stated such a declare may solely come up if possession of the land was first established.
