← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/10637/2019dismissed

Vidhyadhar Ram @ Vidhadhar Ram v. The State Of Bihar

2019-05-10Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10637 of 2019 ====================================================== 1.

Vidhyadhar Ram @ Vidhadhar Ram S/o Late Nimchand Ram Resident of village- Ismiyilpur, P.S- Doriganj, District- Saran. 2.

Tetari Devi W/o Rameshwar Ram Resident of village- Ismiyilpur, P.SDoriganj, District- Saran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate Saran. 2.

The District Magistrate Saran.

3.

The District Land acquisition officer District- Saran. 4.

Kosiyia Devi W/o Late Jangbadhur Ram Resident of village- Ismiyilpur, P.S- Doriganj, District- Saran.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Awadhesh Kumar Singh For the State :

Mr.Sajid Salim Khan (SC-25) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 10-05-2019 Though, the case has been listed with office notes, pointing out certain defects, considering the nature of dispute involved, ignoring the said defects, I proceed to dispose of the writ application, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties.

This writ application has been filed on 09.05.2019, seeking quashing of the order dated 01.07.2013, passed by the District Land Acquisition Officer, Saran, whereby he had directed for payment of amount of compensation, upon acquisition of the land in favour of Kosiyia Devi (respondent

Patna High Court CWJC No.10637 of 2019(2) dt.10-05-2019 2/2 no.4 herein).

The petitioners claim that they were entitled for receiving the amount of compensation, which has been wrongly paid to the said Kosiyia Devi.

It is the case of the petitioners that on the basis of incorrect and irrelevant documents produced by the said Kosiyia Devi, the District Land Acquisition Officer had ordered for payment of amount of compensation.

I do not find any explanation at all for the delay of six years in filing the application. The petitioners do not appear to have approached any authority, after the land was admittedly acquired six years back.

Considering the facts, as noted above, I do not find any merits in this writ application, which is accordingly dismissed.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) HR/- U