Jamiruddin v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20059 of 2018 ====================================================== Jamiruddin Son of Abdul Hamid, Resident of Indrpur, P.S.- Pothia, DistrictKishanganj. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through the Collector, Kishanganj. 2.

The Collector, Kishanganj.

3.

The District Land Acquisition Officer, Kishanganj. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Subash Chandra Yadav, GP 15 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 04-11-2025 Heard Ms. Chitra Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf or the State.

2. The petitioner, in the present writ petition, prays for the following reliefs:- "I. For quashing the letter No. 17

(30) and 29 (50) dated 21.07.2018 and letter No. 2992 and 3023 dated 23.07.2018 issued by respondent No.3 the District Land Acquisition Officer, Kishanganj, whereby notice has been issued to the petitioner to refund the excess amount of Rs. 569427/- (Rs. 1,19,427 4,50,000), which was paid to the petitioner as a compensation of lands acquired for construction of barrier (Bandh) under the

Patna High Court CWJC No.20059 of 2018(2) dt.04-11-2025 2/3 Land Acquisition Act.

II. For further direction to restrain the respondent No.3 from taking any coercive action against the petitioner in pursuance of the aforementioned notices.

III. For any other relief/reliefs for which the petitioner is entitled in the eye of law."

3. The case of the petitioner is that the payment was made and now the notice has been issued by the Office of the Collector, Kishanganj dated 21.07.2018 asking him to return the excess amount and/or file its objection which needs to be interfered with.

4. Learned State counsel, with the help of the counter affidavit, submits that a simple notice was issued to him taking into account that due to error, excess amount has been paid. If the petitioner had any objection, he could have filed the same instead of rushing to this Court.

5. The counter affidavit of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 came to be filed on 14.02.2022 after service of copy to the learned counsel for the petitioner which has not been rebutted.

6. The submission put forth by the learned State counsel is valid. If the petitioner has any objection, proper

Patna High Court CWJC No.20059 of 2018(2) dt.04-11-2025 3/3 objection petition be filed pursuant to the notice issued in the year 2018 which can be taken to its logical conclusion, if still not concluded.

7. Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observation.

8. Before parting, this court would like to put on record name of learned counsel Ms. Chitra Dwivedi, for the petitioner, for the proper assitance rendered in the matter. (Rajiv Roy, J) GAURAV S./- U