SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, J. - (1.) This writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, wherein the order dated 01.05.2018, as contained under Memo No. 728 dated 01.05.2018 (Annexure-5) is under challenge, whereby and whereunder, the claim of the petitioner is for compensation, in lieu of acquisition of land, has been rejected, is under challenge.
(2.) The brief facts of the case of the petitioner is that the land, in which, he is also one of the title-holder, by virtue of order passed in Land Acquisition Case No. 18/62-63 in pursuance thereto, the compensation has been paid in favour of the displaced person in the year 1964, but his claim has not been considered, hence he has approached this Court by filing writ petition, being W.P.(C) No. 2609 of 2016, which was disposed of vide order dated 22.08.2017, wherein a Coordinate Bench of this Court has passed an order, giving liberty to the petitioner to approach before the authority and the authority concerned has directed to take decision on the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law. In terms thereof, the aforesaid reasoned order has been passed on 01.05.2018 by the Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro, by which, the claim of petitioner is rejected on the ground that the compensation has already been paid in favour of the awardees and as such, the petitioner, being the legal heirs of the said awardees cannot be given the claim independently and further on the ground that the said claim is being raised after lapse of 54 years.
(3.) The petitioner, being aggrieved with the said order, approached before this Court for the reason that before coming to the conclusive finding, the authority ought to have gone across the documents, since it was not available as such claim has been rejected, therefore, the aforesaid order cannot be said to be justified.;