Smt. Janak Nandani Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8134 of 2019 ====================================================== Smt. Janak Nandani Devi Wife of Shri Ram Lakhan Prasad R/o VillageBhokilapar, P.O.-Bhokilapar, P.S.-Hilsa, District-Nalanda at present resident of Janki Bhawan, Mahavir Nagar, Hanuman Nagar, New Bypass, Kankarbagh, Patna, Bihar-800020 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar represented through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 2.

The Principal Secretary Department of Land Reform, Revenue, Bihar, Patna 3.

The Principal Secretary Urban Development and Housing Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 4.

The Collector at Patna District-Patna 5.

The District Land Acquisition Officer, Patna District-Patna 6.

The Circle Officer Sampatchak District-Patna ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dilip Kumar For the Respondent/s :

Md. Khurshid Alam (AAG-12) Mr. Majid Mahboob Khan, AC to AAG-12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-04-2019 This writ application has been filed with the assertion that the petitioner's land was acquired in 2009, but the total amount of compensation has not been paid to her. It has been asserted that only 80 per cent of compensation money amounting to Rs. 11,25,850/- has been paid to her so far. It has also been submitted that the petitioner has represented the authorities for payment of the rest 20 per cent of amount in the year 2015. A copy of the said representation has been brought on record. There is no material on record,

Patna High Court CWJC No.8134 of 2019(2) dt.24-04-2019 2/2 however, to suggest that the petitioner was entitled to more amount by way of compensation than what has been paid to her. Neither the award has been brought on record nor there is any material to suggest that the petitioner was entitled to more amount than what has been paid to her.

Apart from delay and laches on the part of the petitioner, insufficiency of pleadings also goes against the petitioner. No relief, therefore, can be granted except an observation that the petitioner shall be at liberty to pursue her remedy before the appropriate forum and dismissal of the writ application will not be treated as any adverse finding on her claim.

This writ application is, accordingly, dismissed, with the aforesaid liberty.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Ashish/- U