Kapildeo Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1372 of 2013 ===========================================================

1. Kapildeo Singh S/O Late Jai Mangal Singh Resident Of Village- Bela Lalu Tola, Police Station- Dariyapur, District- Saran At Chapra. .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. The Principal Secretary, Revenue And Land Reforms Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Director, Rehabilitation And Land Acquisition Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna.

4. The District Magistrate, Saran At Chapra.

5. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Saran At Chapra.

6. The Circle Officer, Dariapur, District- Saran At Chapra.

7. The Union Of India Through Secretary, Ministry Of Railway Rail Bhawan, New Delhi.

8. The Secretary, Department Of Railway, Govt. Of India, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi.

9. The General Manager, East Central Railway, Hajipur.

10. The Chief Engineer, Construction- Ii, East Central Railway, Hajipur.

11. The Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction), East Central Railway, H Ajipur.

12. Sri Ram Das Ram S/O Late Sahvir Ram Resident Of Village- Koela, P.SDariapur, District- Saran At Chapra.

13. Sri Parsuram Prasad S/O Late Pradeep Prasad Resident Of Village Sheetal Tola, Pirganj, P.S- Dighwara, District Saran At Chapra. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. AJAY KUMAR SHARMA For the Respondent/s :

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date: 17-02-2017 The present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed against an order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court on 18.04.2013 in C.W.J.C. No. 7358 of 2013 whereby the writ petition of the appellant has been dismissed.

Patna High Court LPA No.1372 of 2013 dt.17-02-2017 2/2

2. Since the Land Acquisition Act by itself is a complete Code and there are enough remedy available within the frame work of procedure and process prescribed therein, the learned Single Judge has rightly not entertained any grievance of the appellant with regard to the compensation relating to the area of the land which was acquired and the quantum which is sought to be paid to the appellant.

3. These are issues which are not required to be adjudicated within the frame work of Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Let the appellant exhaust the remedy within the frame work of the Land Acquisition Act.

4. No interference is warranted with the order of the learned Single Judge. The Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed. (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) (Nilu Agrawal, J) Amin/- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date Transmission Date