Patna High Court
Lallan Pandey vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 29 August, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14977 of 2018
======================================================
Lallan Pandey, Son of Late Anirudh Pandey, Resident of Village-Jigani, P.O.-
Alampur, P.S.-Baddi Shivsagar, Distirct-Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Land Reforms Department, Government
of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Land Reforms Department, Government
of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of
BIhar, Patna.
5. The District Magistrate, Rohtas.
6. The Additional Collector, Rohtas at Sasaram.
7. The Land Acquisition Officer, Rohtas at Sasaram.
8. The Special Land Acquisition Oficer, Sone Scheme, Sasaram.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rakesh Narayansingh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Vikash Kumar -SC11,
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 29-08-2023
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
2. The present writ petition has been filed with a
limited prayer directing the respondent - Collector to refer his
case before the Competent Authority for Land Acquisition,
Patna Division in terms of Section 64 of the Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency and Land Acquisition
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred
Patna High Court CWJC No.14977 of 2018 dt.29-08-2023
to as the 'Act of 2013').
3. Learned counsel for the State raised preliminary
objection that in the light of the Act of 2013, the case of the
petitioner is not maintainable due to the reason that there is a
categorical direction that where Collector fails to make
reference within prescribed period then the applicant may apply
to the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement
Authority.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner in response
submits that the petitioner has earlier moved before this Hon'ble
Court in CWJC No. 6412 of 2014 in which liberty was granted
to the petitioner to file application in referring the matter to
Civil Court under Section 18 and if such an application is filed,
the authority would refer the matter to Civil Court for proper
adjudication in accordance with law immediately.
5. He further submits that subsequently, in Civil
Review No.159 of 2015, preferred by the petitioner, he was
found entitle to receive payment under the Act of 2013 whereas
the land was acquired under the old Act, 1894. Counsel submits
that it is due to this reason, he has apprehension in his mind that
his award has been prepared in the old Act, but payment has
been made under the new Act then the authority may at later
Patna High Court CWJC No.14977 of 2018 dt.29-08-2023
stage create problem to him. In this view of the matter, he
submits that he moved before this Hon'ble Court to seek a
categorical direction in this case so that the complication may
not arise in future.
6. Learned counsel for the State submits that it is a
clear cut stand of the State that the petitioner has a remedy to
file application before the competent authority under the Act of
2013.
7. In this background, the writ petition is allowed
directing the petitioner to file application directly before the
Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority
under the provisions of the Act of 2013.
8. With the above observation and direction, the writ
petition stands disposed of.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Ashwini/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 31.08.2023
Transmission Date NA
