VINAY KUMAR, MANOJ KUMAR, SANJAY KUMAR SON OF LATE RAJ KISHORE YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR
HIGH COURT OF PATNA
Vinay Kumar, Manoj Kumar, Sanjay Kumar Son Of Late Raj Kishore Yadav
STATE OF BIHAR
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.)THE petitioners are aggrieved by the action of State in depriving them of their land without authority of law. Counter affidavit is on record with a rejoinder thereto.
Interlocutory application has been filed being IA No 145 of 2014 for a direction to the State to produce the original records of land acquisition case bearing No 5 of 1984 -1985 of Patna. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, with their consent for final disposal at this stage, in view of the facts to be noted, there is no necessity of passing order in respect of the interlocutory application.
(2.)PETITIONERS are aggrieved by steps taken to acquire 41 decimals of land appertaining to Cadastral Survey Plot No 3, Khata No 216 appertaining to Touzi No 26 situated at Mauza Kumhrar, Azimabad, Kadamkuan, Patna. The said land stood recorded in the name of Ram Tahal Yadav who died leaving behind three sons, namely, Hazari Lal Yadav, Ragho Yadav and Shivnandan Yadav. The petitioners are descendants of the aforesaid three brothers.
(3.)IT appears that on 16.07.1984, notification under Section -4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was published in the District Gazette, Patna in respect of the aforesaid land showing intention to acquire the same for establishment of Patna Sadar Prakhand Mukhyalaya. Petitioners' predecessors -in -interest had filed objection to the acquisition proceedings which was registered as Land Acquisition Case No 5 of 1984 - 1985. It appears that these objections were not being considered. Fathers of the petitioners then filed CWJC No 1475 of 1984 which was disposed of on 23.03.1984 directing the objection to be preferred and considered before the authorities. State states that accordingly the objection was considered and rejected by the Additional Collector, Patna on 06.06.1984. State alleges that thereafter, on 16.07.1984, Section 6 declaration was made in the District Gazette. State, in the counter affidavit, further states that thereafter compensation was offered to the petitioners but they refused to accept the same, as such, it was deposited in the District Treasury. It is then stated that on 18.09.1986, possession was allegedly taken by the State. State, therefore, submits that the acquisition proceedings were complete and the property vested in the State.
Petitioners state, which is not contradicted in the counter affidavit, that petitioners are in actual physical possession as of date. Petitioners state that soon after the acquisition notification was published for construction of the Patna Sadar Prakhand Mukhyalaya, State constructed the said Mukhyalaya behind Eliphinston Cinema, East Gandhi Maidan, Patna. Petitioners state that as the office was constructed in a different place, in fact no step was taken to take actual physical possession but only paper work was done. Petitioners further aver that in fact no award was made and no payment to them was tendered. It is for this reason that the interlocutory application has been filed for a direction to the State to produce the original records to show that in fact no physical possession was taken nor was any award prepared. The alleged acquired land was left as it is. In the counter affidavit of the State, it is admitted that though the lands were acquired as far back as in 1984 -1986, till date, no construction has been done and it is because of that reason, petitioners have repossessed the land and stake their claim.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.