Disposed

Saurabh Sonu v. The Union of India

Patna HC5 Jul 2023CWJC/1000/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order disposed of a writ petition concerning compensation for land acquired by rail. The Court did not award compensation directly but directed the petitioners to file an application with the District Magistrate to refer the matter to the Divisional Commissioner as the statutory arbitrator.

What did the court decide?

Directing petitioners to file a fresh application before the District Magistrate who shall refer the matter to the Divisional Commissioner-arbitrator.

Saurabh Sonu Vs The Union of India — Land Acquisition | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1000 of 2023

¶2

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

¶3

Saurabh Sonu Son of Late Raj Kishore Yadav Resident of VillageMaidhiya, P.S.- Triveniganj, District- Supaul.

¶4

Shishir Kumar, Son of Deep Narayan Prasad Yadav Resident of VillageBishanpur, P.O.- Hardi, P.S.- Supaul, District- Supaul.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The Union of India through the General Manager, Arariya Supaul New Rail Line Pariyojana, East Central Railway, Samastipur Division, DistrictSamastipur, Bihar.

¶8

The General Manager, Arariya Supaul New Rail Line Pariyojana, East Central Railway, Samastipur Division, District- Samastipur, Bihar.

¶9

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reform Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶10

The Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reform Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶11

The Secretary, Land Acquisition and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶12

The District Magistrate,- cum- Land Acquisition Officer, Supaul.

¶13

¶14

¶15

The Land Acquisition Officer, Supaul.

¶16

The Circle Officer, Triveniganj, Supaul.

¶17

... ... Respondent/s

¶18

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shyameshwar Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Md. Khurship Alam, AAG-12 For the UOI : Mr. Tuhin Shankar, CGC ======================================================

¶19

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL JUDGMENT

¶20

Date : 05-07-2023

¶21

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned

¶22

counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Railway.

¶23

The present writ petition has been filed for directing the respondent authorities to pay appropriate compensation to petitioner no.1 in respect of his land situated in

¶24

Patna High Court CWJC No.1000 of 2023 dt.05-07-2023 2/3

¶25

Khata No.97 and Khesra No. 2130 at Mauja- Latauna, P. S. No. 273 and for petitioner no.2 bearing same land for measuring 0.8 dismal and 0.22 dismal respectively.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the said land has been acquired under emergent provision as published in newspaper on 02.03.2022 for the purpose of construction of railway. Counsel further submits that offer has been made vide Record No. 25 of 2022 (Annexure-2) by which 80% compensation amount was offered to accept. Counsel further submits that it was lower price, therefore, petitioners have filed objection alongwith online rent receipt as well as the other documents but thereafter nothing have and hence, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition for payment of their compensation at the enhance rate.

¶27

Learned counsel for the State submits that the land acquisition has been made under the Railway Act read with RFCTLARRA, 2013. Counsel further submits that according to Railways Act, 1989 under Section 20F the Divisional Commissioner has been appointed as Arbitrator in respect of acquisition of railway and therefore, according to him the petitioners ought to move before the Divisional Commissioner as an Arbitration Case or the petitioners ought to move before

¶28

Patna High Court CWJC No.1000 of 2023 dt.05-07-2023 3/3

¶29

the Collector so that their matter may be referred before the Arbitrator who is Divisional Commissioner.

¶30

In this background, the present writ petition is disposed off directing the petitioners that they shall file a fresh representation/application before the District Magistrate, Supaul within 30 days from today, who shall make reference to the case of the petitioners before the Arbitrator-cum-Divisional Commissioner to hear the matter relating to petitioners within four weeks thereafter.

¶31

Delay, if any, in filing the application may

¶32

condone.

¶33

ravishankar/-

¶34

AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date
Transmission Date

Saurabh Sonu v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saurabh Sonu v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Savitri Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Pujan Thakur Vs The State of Bihar

Yogendra Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Abhishek Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Anirudh Pandey Vs The State of Bihar

Priya Ranjan Jha Vs The State of Bihar