Ajeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14155 of 2017 ====================================================== Ajeet Kumar Son of Late Yashwant Prasad, resident of Village- Yamunapur P.S. Bihta, District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State Of Bihar and Ors 2.
The District Magistrate, Patna.
3.
The Land Aquisition Officer, Patna.
4.
The Additional Land Acquisition Officer, Patna. 5.
The Circle Officer, Bihta. '
6.
Shanti Devi, W/o Late Yashwant Prasad, resident of Village Yamunapur, P.S. Bihta, District- Patna.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ravi Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Raj Kishore Roy-Gp18 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 31-01-2026 I.A. No. 02 of 2022 The present I.A. has been preferred by Shanti Devi submitting that though she was the objector which followed the notice/order, the petitioner suppressed the said fact and instead has made an imposter, Shanti Devi (respondent no. 6), wife of Yashwant Prasad as party respondent in this case.
2. Considering the aforesaid fact and in the interest of justice, it is essential that I.A. No. 02 of 2022 is allowed and another Shanti Devi, wife of Awadh Kishore Saw who was objector before the respondent authorities be impleaded as respondent no. 7 in the present petition.
2/4 CWJC No. 14155 of 2017
3. Heard the parties.
4. The present application has been preferred for the following relief(s):
(a) To quash the impugned order (Annexure P-6) dated 28. 8. 17 passed by respondent No. 4 (Additional Land Acquisition Officer, Patna) in Land Acquisition Case No. 1/ 2011-12 Whereby and where under the earlier award and Compensation given to petitioner with respect to his acquired raiyati land has been reviewed on a Objection petition filed by Private respondent no. 6 at a belated stage and accordingly the petitioner has been directed to refund the Compensation money.
(b)To stay the Consequential notice Contained in Memo No. 256 dated 29.
8. 2017 (Annexure P-7) issued in light of impugned order by respondent to petitioner to refund the award money amounting to Rs.
1893511/- ( Eighteen lacs Ninety here thousand five hundred eleven) by 13.9. 2017 (c) To refer the whole matter arising out of Land Acquisition Case No.
01/2011-12 pertaining to Mauja Sikandarpur Thana No. 51, Khata No. 58 Khesra No. 729 Rakba 0. 47 Acre to Authority for adjudicating the claim of the parties with
3/4 respect to aforesaid disputed land.
(d) For any other relief/ reliefs for which the petitioner may be entitled in the present facts and circumstances of the case.
5. The matter relates to Land Acquisition Case No. 01 of 2011-12 pertaining to Mauja- Sikandarpur, Thana No. 58, Khesra No. 729, Area- 0.47 acre pursuant to Land Acquisition Proceeding No. 01 of 2011-12 for construction of Mega Industrial Park in the district of Patna.
6. The petitioner submitted document and received compensation amount but later, Shanti Devi, wife of Awadh Kishore Saw, resident of Village- Yamunapur, Bihta, Patna made an application that the land belongs to her and the petitioner has wrongly received the compensation amount and as such, direction was issued to refund Rs. 18,93,511/-.
7. Challenging the same, the writ petition.
8. A counter affidavit has come on behalf of the State respondent and in paragraphs 9 and 10, it has been recorded that since the petitioner failed to refund the amount, a process has been initiated for initiation of certificate case for the recovery of the amount vide an order dated 07.11.2017.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner after some argument submits that he shall be appearing before the said
4/4 certificate case to prove his point.
10. Shanti Devi, wife of Awadh Kishore Saw submits that she shall also be appearing and shall be proving her point before the said certificate proceeding.
11. Considering the aforesaid submissions as also the fact that State has gone for certificate case for the realization of the amount, directing the Presiding Officer to conclude it at an earliest if still not concluded, the writ petition is disposed of.
12. All the I.A.(s) and the interim orders stand merged with the final order.
(Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U