Parikshit Singh v. The Union Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 3621 of 2023 ====================================================== Parikshit Singh Son of Sri Abhimanyu Singh Resident of Village-Gamahar, near Madhukar Rai Railway Station, P.S.-Gamahar, District-Ghazipur, Uttar Pradesh.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Railway, Government of India, New Delhi.

2.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Collector Cum the District Magistrate, Buxar. 4.

The District Land Acquisition Officer, Buxar. 5.

The Sub Divisional Officer, Buxar.

6.

The Circle Officer, Chausa, Buxar.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the U.O.I.

:

Mr. Awadhesh Kr. Pandey, Sr. C.G.C.

Mr. Lokesh, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Nutan Sahay, AC to AAG-12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 27-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned senior counsel for the Union of India and learned counsel for the State.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for the purpose of construction of rail corridor, the raiyati land of the petitioner was taken, which is situated in Revenue Thana No. 2, Khata No. 94, Khesra No. 1694, Mouza Chausa in the district of Buxar and measuring 2.9953 decimals which is commercial in nature.

Patna High Court CWJC No. 3621 of 2023(2) dt.27-07-2023 2/3

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the said land has been taken without any consent or information provided to the petitioner. Counsel submits that the gazette notification has been made in that said area under Section 11(1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 but in the said notification, the petitioner's land has not figured.

4. Counter-affidavit has not been filed in this case either on behalf of the State or on behalf of the Union of India.

5. Upon specific query from the Court to the counsel for the petitioner that whether petitioner has filed any representation before the authorities or not, counsel submits that since the land of the petitioner was taken, whose description has not been shown in the notification, therefore, he has directly come to the High Court.

6. In this background, the petitioner is directed to represent himself before the Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Buxar with all details of his land and the Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Buxar is directed to verify the same and pass a reasoned and speaking order holding that whether the petitioner's land has been taken or not and if taken, the

Patna High Court CWJC No. 3621 of 2023(2) dt.27-07-2023 3/3 entitlement of the petitioner towards the payment of compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 or any other law for the time being in force within eight weeks from the date of production of this order.

7. With this direction, the present writ application stands disposed off.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) sadique/- U