Aashish Ranjan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13421 of 2023 ====================================================== Aashish Ranjan S/o-Late Dilip Kumar @ Late Dilip Kumar Dipak, Resident of Village-Tatma Toli Shankar Chowk, Police Station-Khajanchi Hat, DistrictPurnea. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, revenue and Land Reform department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The District Land Acquisition Officer, Collectorate Purnea, Purnea. 3.

The District Magistrate-Cum-Collector, Purnea 4.

The Additional Collector, Purnea.

5.

The Circle Officer, Purnia east, Purnea.

6.

The Manager, Power Grid Corporation of India Limited, Bypass, Maranga, Lalganj, Purnia, Bihar.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar Choudhary, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Md. Khurshid Alam ( Aag 12 ) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 28-04-2026 Heard the parties.

2. The present application has been preferred for the following relief(s):

(I) for issuance of an appropriate writ/writs or order/orders or direction/directions in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.2 & 3 to pay the compensation amount at the present rate/fair rate for the land (II) For issuance of an appropriate writ/writs or order/orders or direction/directions in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.2 & 3 to take step

2/4 for modification of Award in fair and transparent manner since complications was been made in issuance of notice by the authority concerned/Land Acquisition Officer, Purnea for no any latches on the part of petitioner or his grandfathergrandmother/father.

(III) And any other relief/reliefs may also be granted in favour of the petitioner for which he is found to be entitled in view of the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. A counter affidavit has come on behalf of the respondent nos. 3 to 5 duly signed by the District Land Acquisition Officer, Purnea and paragraph 6 read as follows:

6. That order was passed for the payment of compensation to the landholders including the predecessors of the petitioner. But, objections were filed against the amount of compensation. Hence many landholder filed objection. Subsequently the learned Additional Collector, Purnea referred the matter to the Court of learned Sub Judge 1st, Purnea U/s3D of the land Acquisition Act where separate cases were registered. Out of those cases L.A. Case No.28/1999 and L.A. Case No. 29/1999 were filed by the landholder Kusumi Devi and others and Kusumi Devi respectively. The District land Acquisition Officer, Purnea deposited compensation amount of to the court of learned Sub Judge 1,

3/4 Purnea. those the cases In state of Bihar filed its statement of fact but subsequently under the order of the learned Collector, Purnea the statement of fact filed in L.A. Case No.28/1999 and L.A. Case No. 29/1999 were withdrawn so that due compensation could be paid to the landholder. Accordingly the learned Sub Judge, 1st, Purnea dismissed both the cases as withdrawn.

Thereafter the Land Acquisition Officer, Purnea made request to the learned Sub Judge 1st, Purnea to pass an order to release the amount of compensation deposited in the court. But no order has yet passed by the learned Sub Judge 1st Purnea. Hence payment of to the petitioner compensation could not be made.

4. The compensation amount deposited in the Civil Court in L.A. Case No. 28/1999 and L.A. Case No. 29/1999 have not been released by the Competent Court at Purnea.

5. Though the Land Aquisition Officer, Purnea records that no order has been passed on the request made earlier for the release of the amount, there is neither any date nor document to support the said request.

6. In that background, the State respondents, specially the Collector, Purnea and the District Land Acquisition Officer, Purnea are directed to file a proper petition before the Competent Civil Court for the release of the compensation amount deposited

4/4 in L.A. Case No. 28/1999 and L.A. Case No. 29/1999 and if such petition is filed and the Court is satisfied with the contention put forward, the amount be immediately released in favour of the Collector, Purnea.

7. Once the compensation amount is released, the Collector, Purnea shall be issuing notice to those land-holders whose compensation amount was/were deposited in the aforesaid L.A. Case No. 28/1999 and L.A. Case No. 29/1999 and after satisfying with the documents, shall be releasing the compensation amount in accordance with law.

8. It is expected both from the Competent Civil Court and the Collector, Purnea that the process shall be completed by the end of this Year.

9. The writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid observation.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U