Dismissed

Gajindra Sahni v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC9 Jan 2023L.P.A/154/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court dismissed an appeal against an order declaring a pending pre-emption case abated due to a legislative amendment. The court upheld the Collector's direction to refund the deposited pre-emption money along with 10% interest, rejecting any claim for further interest.

What did the court decide?

Collection of deposited money with 10% interest directed; appeal dismissed.

Gajindra Sahni Vs The State of Bihar — Land Acquisition | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.154 of 2020

¶2

¶3

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.681 of 2020

¶4

======================================================

¶5

Gajindra Sahni S/o Nakachhed Sahni Resident of Village- Lalbegiya, P.O.Misrauliya, P.S.- Chiraiya, District- East Champaran.

¶6

Lakhinder Sahni S/o Nakchhed Sahni Resident of Village- Lalbegiya, P.O.Misrauliya, P.S.- Chiraiya, District- East Champaran.

¶7

Birendra Sahni S/o Nakchhed Sahni Resident of Village- Lalbegiya, P.O.Misrauliya, P.S.- Chiraiya, District- East Champaran.

¶8

... ... Appellant/s

¶9

Versus

¶10

The State of Bihar through the Collector, Motihari, East Champaran.

¶11

The Land Reform Development Commissioner Sikrahna at Dhaka, East Champaran.

¶12

Raj Kishore Sahni S/o Late Sita Ram Sahni Resident of Village- Khartari Tola Lalbegiya, P.O.- Misrauliya, P.S.- Chiraiya, District- East Champaran.

¶13

Mostt. Chuliya W/o Late Amal Sahni Resident of Village- Shitalpur, P.O. and P.S.- Sugauli, District- East Champaran.

¶14

... ... Respondent/s

¶15

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Sunil Kumar No.III, Adv. For the State : Ms. Nutan Sahay, AC to AAG12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR)

¶16

Date : 09-01-2023

¶17

Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar No.III learned counsel

¶18

for the appellants/pre-emptors and Ms. Nutan Sahay for

¶19

the State.

¶20

The appellants were pre-emptors whose application was allowed by the D.C.L.R., propelling the

¶21

Patna High Court L.P.A No.154 of 2020 dt.09-01-2023 2/4

¶22

respondents to challenge the aforesaid order before the Collector in appeal. The matter remained pending consideration for seven years. In the meantime, Section 16(3) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 was deleted and Section 4 was inserted which declares that after the repeal of Section 16(3) of the Act, all cases of proceedings pending before the State Government, the Board of Revenue, the Bihar Land Tribunal, the Divisional Commissioner, the Collector, the Additional Collector, the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms or in any other Court shall be deemed to have abated.

¶23

Sub-clause 2 of said 16(4) further declares that pursuant to the repeal of Sub-Section 3 of Section 16 of the Act, any purchased money together with a sum equal to 10% thereof already legally deposited shall be refunded, without any interest to the depositor.

¶24

Acting on the aforesaid repeal, the Collector passed an order declaring the entire case to have abated

¶25

Patna High Court L.P.A No.154 of 2020 dt.09-01-2023 3/4

¶26

and directed for refund of the money to the

¶27

appellants/pre-emptors along with 10% interest which they may have deposited but without any interest.

¶28

The aforesaid order of the Collector was challenged before this Court vide CWJC No. 681 of 2020 by which the order passed by the Collector declaring the case to have abated and the appellants/pre-emptors be returned the money, was upheld.

¶29

The orders passed by the Collector and the learned Single Judge are absolutely justified in view of the deletion of Section 16(3) and incorporation of Section 16(4) of the Act from the cut-off date.

¶30

The necessary amendment in the aforesaid provision of the Act was not without a reason. We do not consider it to be necessary to discuss in detail the reasons for incorporation of aforesaid provision namely 16(4) after deletion of 16(3) but, the fact remains that once the case is abated, 16(4) (ii) shall come into play and the appellants would only be entitled to return of the money along with

¶31

Patna High Court L.P.A No.154 of 2020 dt.09-01-2023 4/4

¶32

10% interest which they had deposited at the time of filing

¶33

of preemption application.

¶34

Thus, we find no reason to interfere with the

¶35

order of the learned Single Judge.

¶36

The petition is dismissed.