Himanshu Kumar Akela @ Himanshu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3799 of 2017 ====================================================== Himanshu Kumar Akela @ Himanshu Kumar Son of Sukhdev Prasad Singh Resident of Village- Sherpar, P.O.- Barbigha, District- Sheikhpura. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4.

The Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Sheikhpura. 5.

The Additional Collector, Shekhpura.

6.

The District Land Acquisition Officer, Sheikhpura 7.

The Circle Officer, Barbigha, District- Sheikhpura. 8.

The Union of India through the General Manager, East-Central Railways, Danapur.

9.

The Divisional Rail Manager, East- Central Railways, Danapur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mayank Rukhaiyar For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Chittranjan Sinha -PAAG-2 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 28-02-2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. From the pleadings on record, it appears that it is the petitioner's case that he has title in respect of a piece of land appertaining to Khata No. 284, Khesara No. 19 at Mauza Narayanpur, Pargana-Maldah, Thana No. 62, Tauzi No. 285 in the district of Sheikhpura on the basis of a Hukumnama issued

Patna High Court CWJC No.3799 of 2017(3) dt.28-02-2019 2/3 in his favour by the ex-landlord. Treating the said land, however, to be a Gairmajarua Malik, the same is being utilized by the respondents for the purpose of construction of railway line. The petitioner has a grievance that in the light of the decision of the State Government as contained in Memo No.925 dated 11.11.2014, the land in question, ought to have been treated to be belonging to the petitioner and, therefore, without conducting any land acquisition proceeding, the said land could not have been utilized for the purpose of construction of railway line. The petitioner is said to have filed representation, in this regard, before the District Land Acquisition Officer, Seikhpura on 30.12.2014, which according to him, is still pending.

3. Considering the nature of the grievance, which the petitioner is seeking, this application is disposed of with an observation that if the said representation of the petitioner dated 30.12.2014, is still pending, let the same be disposed of, in accordance with law, by the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Sheikhpura.

4. It goes without saying that the petitioner shall have liberty to approach the Public Grievance Redressal Officer under the Bihar Right to Public Grievance Redressal Act, 2015, in this regard.

Patna High Court CWJC No.3799 of 2017(3) dt.28-02-2019 3/3

5. This application stands disposed of.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) arun/- U