Sushil Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1550 of 2016 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 6006 of 2014 =========================================================== Sushil Kumar Singh son of Late Kishna Prasad, resident of village Sabalpur, P.S. Panjawar, District Banka .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Director, Land Acquisition Department, Bihar, Patna

2. The District Magistrae, Banka, District Banka

3. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Banka, District Banka

4. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Bhagalpur, District Bhagalpur

5. The Additional Land Acquisition Officer, District Bhagalpur .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : None For the Respondent/s : None =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date: 01-05-2017 None appears for the parties.

Perused the record.

Seeking exception to an order dated 30.06.2016 passed by the learned Writ Court in C.W.J.C. No.6006 of 2014, this appeal has been filed under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. Land acquisition proceedings were held in Land Acquisition Case No.36 of 1961-62 and way back on 26.10.1970 the award was passed and petitioner's father late Kishna Prasad Singh was paid the award. Thereafter, as the land acquisition proceedings were given up or withdrawn on 28.10.1972, notice was issued to petitioner's

Patna High Court LPA No.1550 of 2016 dt.01-05-2017 2/2 father to deposit the amount of award with 6% interest and take back the land, failing which it was noticed that the land shall stand vested in the government. Petitioner's father did not do anything during his life time and the petitioner also kept quite for 44 years and thereafter filed the writ petition seeking release of the land. After analyzing the matter, in detail, the learned Writ Court held that now after a period of 44 years, no mandamous can be issued for return of the land and dismissed the writ petition. In our considered view, in doing so the learned Writ Court has not committed any error warranting reconsideration. The appeal is dismissed.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Sudhir Singh, J) Narendra/- AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.

CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 05.05.2017 Transmission Date