Madan Mohan Prasad Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1500 of 2015 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 24062 of 2013 ======================================================

1. Madan Mohan Prasad Singh son of Late Ambika Prasad Singh, Residentof Village - Birpur, P.S. Birpur, Distt. - Begusarai .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Sri Vyas son of not known, Principal Secretary, Department Revenue, Government of Bihar, Patna

3. Sri Sunil Kumar Singh, son of not known, Commissioner, Commissionary, Munger

4. Smt. Sima Tripathi, District Magistrate, Begusarai

5. Sri Shesh Nath Singh, son of not known, the District Land Acquisition Officer(retired on 31.1.2015), Begusarai, Distt. - Begusarai

6. Sri Rahul Burman son of not known, the present District Land Acquisition Officer, Begusarai, Distt. - Begusarai

7. Sri Ramesh Kumar Singh, son of not known, Block Development Officer, Birpur, Distt. - Begusarai .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Y.B. Giri, Sr. Advocate Mr. Ashish Giri, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ajay Bihari Sinha, GA-8 Mr. Suryakant Kumar, AC to GA-8 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 03-10-2016 The petitioner is directed to make necessary correction in the number of annexures, which has been mentioned in the Supplementary Show Cause.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.

As per the learned counsel for the petitioner, the compensation amount has not been paid in terms of the

Patna High Court MJC No.1500 of 2015 (7) dt.03-10-2016 2/2 direction of this Court under the Rights to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, but the amount has been calculated as if the land has been taken under the lease is disobedience to the order passed by this Court, whereas learned counsel for the State has submitted that whatever the amount is paid to the petitioner, has been calculated Amended Act and has been paid and, as such, the order of this Court has been complied with. This Court, in the present proceeding, cannot go into the validity of the award, can be gone in different proceeding. The petitioner, so advised, may take legal recourse as is available to the petitioner under the law.

With the aforesaid observation and direction, this application is disposed of.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) ajaypd./- U