Patna High Court
Akhouri Arun Kumar Singh vs The Union Of India on 5 August, 2024
Author: Rajesh Kumar Verma
Bench: Rajesh Kumar Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8897 of 2021
======================================================
1. Akhouri Arun Kumar Singh S/o Late Akhouri Madan Mohan Singh R/o
Village and P.O. Churamanpur, P.S.- Buxar Industrial, District- Buxar, Bihar,
presently residing at Nandan Homes Apartment, A-32, Khajpura, Bailey
Road, P.S.- Shashtri Nagar, District- Patna.
2. Akhouri Ashok Kumar Singh S/o Late Akhouri Madan Mohan Singh R/o
Village and P.O. Churamanpur, P.S.- Buxar Industrial, District- Buxar, Bihar,
presently residing at Nandan Homes Apartment, A-32, Khajpura, Bailey
Road, P.S.- Shashtri Nagar, District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union of India through the Managing Director, National Highway
Authority of India, New Delhi.
2. The Project Director, NHAI (NH-84), Maqbool Alam Road, Varanasi.
3. The Regional Officer, NHAI, D-63, 1st Floor, Rajesh Kumar Path, S.K. Puri,
Boring Road, Patna-1.
4. The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate, Buxar.
5. The Competent Authority-cum-DCLR, Buxar.
6. The Circle Officer, Buxar.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nikhil Kumar Agrawal, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Md. Faiz Ahmed, AC to GP 14
For UOI : Mr. Arjun Kumar, CGC
For NHAI : Mr. Kumar Goutam, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 05-08-2024
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
counsel appearing on behalf of Union of India, National
Highway Authority of India as well as for the State.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for the
following reliefs:-
i) To issue an appropriate
writ/order/direction in the nature of
Certiorari quashing the order dated
07.09.2020
(Anx-3) passed by Respondent
No. 5 whereby and whereunder the
Respondents are seeking to recover the
amount of compensation paid to the
Petitioners;
Patna High Court CWJC No.8897 of 2021 dt.05-08-2024
ii) To issue an appropriate
writ/order/direction in the nature of
Mandamus declaring that the amount of
compensation must be determined in terms
of the spot/site verification and the report of
the six man committee;
iii) To issue an appropriate
writ/order/direction in the nature of
Mandamus commanding the Respondents to
release the compensation amount for the
entire area of land acquired by the
Respondents by considering the nature of
the land as 'Commercial' in terms of the six
man committee report and spot verification.
iv) To issue an appropriate
writ/order/direction in the nature of
Mandamus commanding the Respondents
not to recover the amount of compensation
paid in the year 2018 to the Petitioners;
v) To stay the order dated 07.09.2020
passed by Respondent No. 5 during the
pendency of this writ application;
vi) To any other relief or reliefs for which
the Petitioners are found entitled to in the
facts and circumstances of the case.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
land of the petitioners were acquired for the purpose of the four-
laning of N.H. 84 in the district of Buxar, the National
Highways Authority of India (NHAI), exercising its power
under NHAI Act, 1956, had issued the necessary notifications in
the Official Gazette for acquisition of land. The land of the
petitioners were acquired by the competent authority and the
details of the said land are as follows:-
a. Petitioner No. 1- Mauza - Churamanpur, Thana - 353;
Patna High Court CWJC No.8897 of 2021 dt.05-08-2024
Khesra No. 1440; Area - 0.06 hectare.
b. Petitioner No. 2- Mauza - Churamanpur, Thana - 353;
Khesra No. 1440; Area - 0.06 hectare.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
after completing of the formalities, the petitioners have received
a partial compensation amount of Rs. 20,57,471/- each (after
deduction of TDS) by categorising the land of the petitioners
under the head of 'residential' land instead of 'commercial'. He
further submits that after the aforesaid exercise, the matter of
the petitioners and other similarly situated persons were sent to
the Six-Man Committee which was constituted in order to verify
and deal with all the objections related to the nature of lands to
be acquired. And after the report of the Six-Man Committee, the
District Land Acquisition Officer/competent authority had
issued order dated 07.09.2020 directing the petitioners to refund
an amount of Rs. 10,99,494/- each allegedly paid in excess to
the petitioners.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents have taken a
primary objection with regard to the maintainability of the
present writ petition and submits that the petitioners have not
challenged the Six-Man Committee's report dated 29.02.2020
which declared the classification of the land in question as a
Patna High Court CWJC No.8897 of 2021 dt.05-08-2024
agricultural land and apart from that they submits that although
the petitioners have challenged the Annexure-3 by which the
District Land Acquisition Officer/competent authority had
directed the petitioners to refund an amount of Rs. 10,99,494/-
each, but neither the petitioners have challenged the order dated
29.02.2020 nor they have made the District Land Acquisition
Officer as a party respondent in the present writ petition which
is also evident from the array of the party.
6. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Jagtu Vs.
Suraj Mal and Others, reported in (2010) 13 Supreme Court
Cases 769, referring to the paragraph-6, which reads as
follows:-
"6.The trial court framed a large number of
issues including the issue of maintainability
of the suit for non-joinder of the necessary
parties. After considering the case in
totality, the trial court recorded the finding
on the said issue that the suit was not
maintainable for want of necessary parties
and the suit was dismissed."
7. The Hon'ble Apex Court also in the case of
J.S.Yadav Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another, reported
in(2011) 6 Supreme Court Cases 570, referring to the
paragraph-31, which reads as follows:-
"31. No order can be passed behind the
back of a person adversely affecting him
and such an order if passed, is liable to be
ignored being not binding on such a party
as the same has been passed in violation of
the principles of natural justice. The
Patna High Court CWJC No.8897 of 2021 dt.05-08-2024
principles enshrined in the proviso to Order
1 Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure,
1908 provide that impleadment of a
necessary party is mandatory and in case of
non-joinder of necessary party, the
petitioner-plaintiff may not be entitled for
the relief sought by him. The litigant has to
ensure that the necessary party is before the
court, be it a plaintiff or a defendant,
otherwise the proceedings will have to fail."
8. It appears that the petitioners have neither
challenged the order dated 29.02.2020 passed by the Six-Man
Committee which suggests that the land in question is a
agricultural land nor the petitioners have made the District Land
Acquisition Officer as a party respondent in the present writ
petition.
9. In absence of the necessary party as well as the
aforesaid pronouncement of the Apex Court with regard to
necessary party, this Court is left with no other option except to
dismiss the present writ petition for want of non-joinder of
necessary party.
10. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands
dismissed.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 22.08.2024
Transmission Date NA
