Page 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11479 of 2018
======================================================
Ajay Kumar S/o Late Ramji Prasad R/o Village- Milkipar, Barki Akuana P.O.
Chhotki Akuana, P.S.- Ghosi, District- Jehanabad.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar and Ors
2. The Co-Ordinator, Sone Canal Project, Aurangabad.
3. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Sone Yojna, Daya Mukhya Canal
Project, Aurangabad, Bihar
4. The Executive Engineer, Irrigation Deparment, Jehanabad.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjan Kumar Sharan
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Anjani Kumar -Aag4
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 30-10-2024
In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for
the following relief(s):-
“For issuance of a
direction/directions to the respondents
to pay the compensation of land
acquisition amount to the petitioner
on revised and appropriate rate of
compensation in view of Section 24
(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation
and Transparency in Land Acquisition
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act,
2013 (hereinafter to be referred as
'the Fair Compensation Act, 2013)
and further for payment of
compensation with interest pendete
Page 2
Patna High Court CWJC No.11479 of 2018 dt.30-10-2024
2/3
lite and/or making award upon
multiplying four times of the present
market value of the land and for other
relief/reliefs, order/orders for which
the petitioner is entitled in the facts
and circumstances of the case.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
in respect of the grievance regarding payment of appropriate
and revised amount of compensation for acquisition of the land
in question at new market rate, petitioner has filed
representation before Special Land Acquisition Officer, Sone
Yojna, Daya Mukhya Canal Project, Aurangabad on 30.05.2018
(Annexure-2) but the same has not been decided uptill now.
3. Learned counsel for the State has submitted
that payment regarding acquisition of land in question has
already been made. It has been submitted that land was acquired
in the year 2011 and payment of compensation has been made in
the year 2012. The sole thrust of the petition is for disposal of
the representation submitted by the petitioner vide Annexure-2.
He submits that belated representation made by the petitioner
vide Annexure 2 of the writ petition, is not maintainable in the
light of the submission that the payment has already been made
in the year 2012. He, however, submits that with respect to the
Page 3
Patna High Court CWJC No.11479 of 2018 dt.30-10-2024
3/3
said grievance, petitioner may approach the concerned
authority by filing a fresh representation, which would be
considered as per law
4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
present case and the arguments advanced on behalf of both the
parties, the present writ petition stands disposed of with liberty
to the petitioner to file afresh representation alongwith all
necessary materials for seeking compensation at new rate within
six weeks from the date of receipt of this Order. The concerned
authority is hereby directed to consider petitioner’s grievance
and pass appropriate order expeditiously, as per the law.
(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)
alok/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 30.10.2024.
Transmission Date NA