Kaushalya Devi Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.421 of 2024

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

Kaushalya Devi W/o Bishwanath Prasad, Resident of Village-Salimpur Ahra, Dwarkanath Lane, P.S.-Kadamkuan, District-Patna.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through Additional Chief Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The Director, Revenue and Land Reforms, (Land Acquisition Directorate), Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶8

The District Magistrate, Madhubani.

¶9

The District Land Acquisition Officer, Madhubani Madhubani.

¶10

The Circle Officer, Circle Benipatti, District-Madhubani

¶11

The Project Director, National Highway Authority of India, Project Implementation Unit, Pakai, Supaul.

¶12

... ... Respondent/s

¶13

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

¶14

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramchandra Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sitaram Yadav, GP-16 Mr. Yatindra Narayan, AC to GP-16 For the NHAI : Mr. Kumar Gautam, Advocate ======================================================

¶15

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

¶16

2 02-05-2024 Heard the parties.

¶17

The present petition has been preferred for issuance

¶18

of writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ/ writs or direction/ directions to the respondents to pay the compensation amount to the petitioner in view of notice no. 3705 dated 12.12.2022 alongwith reasonable compound interest since the date of acquisition and compensation for the harassment made by the respondent no.4 to the petitioner.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner straightaway took this Court to the document on record duly signed by the competent Officer-cum-District Land Acquisition Officer,

¶20

Patna High Court CWJC No.421 of 2024(2) dt.02-05-2024 2/6

¶21

Madhubani vide notice no. 3705 dated 12.12.2022 (Annexure-2 to the petition) to show that the amount decided by it came to Rs. 3,47,52,058/-.

¶22

His further submission is that thereafter, Rs. 69,80,047/- was paid and vide 16.08.2023, his office demanded certificate to show that it has converted into commercial category.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this was provided whereafter another payment came to the tune of Rs. 1,49,40,373/- totalling Rs. 2,19,20,420/-.

¶24

He, however, submits that the rest of the amount out of the declared amount RS. 3,47,52,058/- has still eluded the lady. This, despite the fact that the Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Bihar under the signature of the Director, Land Acquisition, Bihar vide it letter dated 07.11.2023 directed the District Land Acquisition Officer, Madhubani to take immediate steps in the matter and also marked the official responsible for this unnecessary delay.

¶25

A counter affidavit has been filed by the same official, the District Land Acquisition Officer, Madhubani and in paragraphs 11, 12 and 14, he has stated about payment to the tune of Rs. 2,19,20,420/-.

¶26

Patna High Court CWJC No.421 of 2024(2) dt.02-05-2024 3/6

¶27

The paragraphs 15 and 16 of the counter affidavit filed by the official read as follows:

¶28

15) That the allegation of the petitioner in Para-13 and 14 of the writ petition is entirely wrong and incorrect version of facts for the purpose of this writ petition. It is submitted that upon the representation dated 30.11.2023 filed by the petitioner the D.L.A.O. Madhubani called for a joint report from the Amin of N.H.A.I. and the Amin of District Land Acquisition Office under the Chairmanship of Circle Officer, Benipatti who after measurement of the land in question on 13.12.2023 submitted joint report dated 13.12.2023 with trace map that as per 3D Gazette the acquired area of Plot No. 4666 is 0.0464589 Hectare but as per alignment map the acquired area comes to 0.0386327 Hectare out of which the acquired area of petitioner Kaushalya Devi is 0.0293047 Hectare, the acquired area of Rishikesh Kumar Jha and Basudeo Jha is 0.0066 Hectare and the acquired area of Ramnandan Jha is 0.002728 Hectare.

¶29

16) That after receiving the report dated 13.12.2023 the D.L.A.O. Madhubani disposed the representation dated 30.11.2023 of the petitioner by a reasoned and speaking order dated 30.12.2023 that

¶30

Patna High Court CWJC No.421 of 2024(2) dt.02-05-2024 4/6

¶31

the petitioner has already received the amount of compensation at commercial rate for her acquired area 0.293047 Hectare of land out of Plot No. 4666 therefore, she not entitled for compensation for the remaining acquired area of Plot No. 4666.

¶32

Annexure R/G/ to the counter affidavit is the order

¶33

passed by the competent authority on 30.12.2023 and the same

¶34

read as follows:

¶35

vuqlwph 14&Qkje la0&5631 vkns’k dh Øe ftyk Hkw&vtZu dk;kZy;] e/kqcuhA vkns’k ij dh la[;k vkSj vfHkys[k la[;k --------------------------------------x;h dkjZokbZ ds rkjh[k ds'k dk izdkj&Hkkjrekyk ifj;kstuk iSdst&1] ckjs esa fVi.kh lsD'ku&2 ¼lkgj?kkV ls jfgdk½ vkns'k vkSj inkf/kdkjh rkjh[k ds lkFk dk gLrk{kj 1 2 3 30@12@2023 Hkkjrekyk ifj;kstuk iSdst&1] lsD'ku&2 ¼lkgj?kkV ls jfgdk½ vUrxZr ekStk&csuhiÍh ds [ksljk la0&4666] jdok&0-464589 gs0 dk eqvkotk jkf'k eks0&3]47]52]058¾00 ¼rhu djksM+ lSrkyhl yk[k ckou gtkj vUBkou½ :i;k Hkqxrku djus gsrq Jhefr dkS'ky;k nsoh ifr fo'oukFk izlkn gkFkh] lkfdu&yrjkgk] iksLV&nks?kjk] ftyk&njHkaxk }kjk Hkqxrku gsrq fnukad&30-11-2023 dks vkosnu i= izkIr gqvk gSA

¶36

izkIr vkosnu ds vkyksd esa bl dk;kZy; ds vkns'k Kkikad&1338@ft0Hkw0v0] fnukad 02-12-2023 ds }kjk vapy vf/kdkjh] csuhiÍh dh v/;{krk esa Hkw&vtZu vehu ,oa ,u0,p0,0vkbZ0 vehu dks la;qDr :i ls fnukad&07-12-2023 dks ekih djus gsrq frfFk fu/kkZfjr djrs gq, funsZ'k fn;k x;kA ijUrq vapy vf/kdkjh] csuhiÍh ds }kjk fnukad&07-12-2023 dks mPp U;k;ky;] iVuk dk;kZy; dk;Z laca/kh dk;Z gksus ds dkj.k iqu% bl dk;kZy; ds vkns'k Kkikad&1177@ft0Hkw0v0 fnukad&11-12-2023 }kjk fnukad&13-12-2023 dks frfFk fu/kkZfjr dj ekih ds i'pkr Li"V izfrosnu ¼vtZuk/khu Hkwfe vUrxZr vkusokys lHkh Hkw/kkjh;ksa dh Hkwfe dks Vªs'k uD'kk esa n'kkZrs gq,½ miyC/k djkus gsrq funsZ'k fn;k x;kA

¶37

mDr vkns'k ds vkyksd esa vapy vf/kdkjh] csuhiÍh ds v/;{krk ,oa ns[kjs[k esa izfrfu;qDr lHkh vehuksa ds }kjk ekStk& csuhiÍh ds R.S. [ksljk la[;k&4666 dk ,u0,p0,0vkbZ0 }kjk iznr ifj;kstuk lajs[k.k uD'kk ds vuqlkj LFky ekih dj vtZuk/khu

¶38

Patna High Court CWJC No.421 of 2024(2) dt.02-05-2024 5/6

¶39

Hkwfe vUrxZr lHkh jS;rksa dh Hkwfe fpfUgr fd;k x;kA 3Mh0 xtV vuqlkj mDr [ksljk la0&4666 dk vftZr jdok&0-0464589 gs0 gSA izfrfu;qDr vehu izfrosnukuqlkj lajs[k.k uD'kk ds ekih vuqlkj jdok&0-0386327 gs0 gksrk gSA orZeku esa lajs[k.k uD'kk ls ekih i'pkr izfrfu;qDr vehu ds izfrosnukuqlkj fofHkUu jS;rksa dh vtZu vUrxZr vkus okyh Hkwfe dk C;kSjk fuEu izdkj ls gS %&

¶40

Ø0la0 Hkw&/kkjh dk uke vftZr jdok ¼gs0 esa½ 1 dkS'kY;k nsoh ifr fo'oukFk izlkn 0-0293047 gkFkh ,oa fo'oukFk gkFkh is0 ¼nksuksa dk la;qDr :i ls vftZr jdok½ 2 _f"k dqekj >k is0 JhukFk dey 0-0066 >k ,oa cklqnso >k is0 mekukFk >k ¼nksuksa ikS= bZUnz dkar >k½ dk la;qDr jdok] lkfdu&ljflo 3 JkeuUnu >k is0 lqjs'k >k] 0-002728 lkfdu&ljflo dqy jdok %& 0-0386327

¶41

mDr [ksljk ls iwoZ esa vkj0lh0Mh0 dk vtZu ugha gSA of.kZr lHkh jS;rksa dh vftZr Hkwfe layXu Vªs'k uD'kk ij fpfUgr dj izfrosnu izkIr gSA

¶42

mYys[kuh; gS fd Jhefr dkS'kY;k nsoh ifr Jh fo'oukFk izlkn gkFkh] lkfdu&yrjkgk] iksLV&nks?kjk] ftyk&njHkaxk ls eqvkotk gsrq izkIr vkosnu ,oa layXu lk{; ds vuqlkj vehu ls izkIr izfrosnukuqlkj ekStk&csuhiÍh ds [ksljk la0&4666 esa jdok& 0- 0293047 gs0 Hkwfe dk eqvkotk Hkqxrku iwoZ esa fd;k tk pqdk gSA

¶43

vr% mijksDr of.kZr fLFkrh esa vkosfndk dks vftZr Hkwfe ds eqvkotk Hkqxrku ds i'pkr izkIr vkosnu ds ek/;e ls 'ks"k vftZr Hkwfe ds eqvkotk jkf'k Hkqxrku gsrq izkIr nkok vkosnu dks [kkfjt fd;k tkrk gSA

¶44

ys[kkfir ,oa la'kksf/krA

¶45

l{ke inkf/kdkjh&lg& l{ke inkf/kdkjh&lg& ftyk Hkw&vtZu inkf/kdkjh ftyk Hkw&vtZu inkf/kdkjh e/kqcuhA e/kqcuhA

¶46

The District Land Acquisition Officer, Madhubani

¶47

has reasoned for the making curtailed payment of Rs. 2,19,20,420/- as against the earlier decision taken of Rs. 3,47,52,058/-. He has clarified that the area that has been acquired is lesser to what was envisaged earlier and some of the

¶48

Patna High Court CWJC No.421 of 2024(2) dt.02-05-2024 6/6

¶49

area belongs to Rishikesh Kumar Jha, Basudev Jha (0.0066 Hectare) and Ramnandan Jha (0.002728 Hectare).

¶50

This Court is satisfied with the clarification given by the State official vide Annexure-R/G dated 30.12.2023. If the petitioner is aggrieved and is still under the impression that despite the said clarification, he is entitled to the original amount decided by the Competent Authority cum District Land Acquisition Officer, Madhubani, he has the liberty to move before the Arbitrator against the decision dated 30.12.2023 as incorporated in the order itself.

¶51

The writ petition stands disposed of with observation that if such petition is preferred before the Arbitrator cum Commissioner, Trihut Division, Darbhanga within four weeks from today, the delay in filing the petition shall be condoned considering the fact that the writ petition of the petitioner was pending before this Court.

¶52

(Rajiv Roy, J)

¶53

kiran/-

¶54

U

Kaushalya Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kaushalya Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nikku Kumar @ Niko Kumar @ Niku Choudhry Vs The State of Bihar

Ajit Poddar Vs The State of Bihar

Adhik Yadav @ Adhki Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Satyendra Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Amrendra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Saroj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar