Pramila Devi @ Pravila Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11838 of 2022 ====================================================== Pramila Devi @ Pravila Devi Wife of Late Rameshwar Prasad Singh, Resident of Village-Badaura, P.O.-Narsanda, P.S.-Chandi, District-Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar.

2.

The Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Nalanda. 3.

The Land Acquisition Officer, Nalanda.

4.

The Circle Officer, Chandi, District-Nalanda. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Jitendra Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Respondents :

Mr. Sajid Salim Khan (SC25) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 21-12-2022 Heard the parties.

The dispute can be decided by the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority("LARRA"). In view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to withdraw this writ petition with a liberty to file an appropriate application before the concerned Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority ("LARRA"). In such view of the matter, the petitioner is directed to file an application before the concerned Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority, ("LARRA") within 60 days from uploading the date of the order. If such an application is filed by the petitioner, the authority concerned

Patna High Court CWJC No.11838 of 2022(4) dt.21-12-2022 2/2 shall hear the case on its merit, after condoning the delay, and dispose of the same in accordance with law within four months from the date of filing of application.

Applicability of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, shall also be decided by the "LARRA". While deciding the matter , the authority will consider the fact that same person has been given compensation treating the land to be residential whereas the land of the petitioner has been considered as agricultural land .

With the aforesaid observations and directions, this application is disposed of.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Harsh/ U