Santosh Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3388 of 2024 ====================================================== 1.
Santosh Kumar Singh son of late Uttam Lal Singh, resident of Ward No.- 4, Village Selra, P.S. Jainagar, District Madhubani, PIN - 847228. 2.
Nawal Kishore Singh, son of Late Uttam Lal Singh, resident of Ward No.- 4, Village Selra, P.S. Jainagar, District- Madhubani, PIN - 847228. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2.
The District Magistrate cum Collector, Madhubani at Madhubani. 3.
The District Land Acquisition Officer, Madhubani. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Dr. Mayanand Jha, Sr. Advocate :
Mr. G.G. Tiwari For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Singh, AAG-13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 20-06-2024 Heard Mr. Mayanand Jha, Senior Advocate learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. The present petition has been preferred:
for the issuance of an appropriate writ / order / direction commanding the respondents to revise the award in connection with Madhubani Land Acquisition Case No. 1 of 2022-23 and make payment of compensation at the Commercial / Residential rate as per the prevailing market rate in the area in accordance with Section 26 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in
Patna High Court CWJC No.3388 of 2024(2) dt.20-06-2024 2/3 Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 and set aside the award and compensation fixed by the Collector under the Act as communicated vide Notice No. 57, 58 and 103 dt. 22.11.2023 and restrain the Respondents from taking possession of the acquired land till fair compensation is not paid to the petitioners.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that while taking up the land for acquisition only in the newspaper, the details were wrongly incorporated and the name of their father was also wrongly given. They objected regarding nature of the land repeatedly but award came to be passed and aggrieved by that, the writ petition.
4. Learned State counsel on the other hand points out that an award has now been passed. However, if the petitioners are aggrieved, they have the remedy before the Competent Authority. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Madhubani now after passing the order cannot review its own order.
5. In that background, the petitioners intend to approach the Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Re-settlement Authority (LARRA) within a period of four weeks from today.
6. If the petitioners approach the concerned authority
Patna High Court CWJC No.3388 of 2024(2) dt.20-06-2024 3/3 within a period of four weeks the limitation petition be considered taking into account that the writ petition was preferred before this Court.
7. Further, after hearing all the concerned parties, the Authority shall expedite the matter and dispose it of preferably within a period of six months from the date the petitioners approach the concerned authority.
8. The writ petition stands disposed of.
(Rajiv Roy, J) Jagdish/- U