Patna High Court - Orders
Rajiwa Ranjan Singh vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 16 September, 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.586 of 2005
Rajiwa Ranjan Singh, son of Shri Rajdeo Singh,
resident of Village and Post Office-Dharupur, Police
Station-Bikramganj, District-Rohtas...
...Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary,
Old Secretariat, Patna,
2. The Collector, Rohtas at Sasaram,
3. The Executive Engineer, Department of
Building Construction, Building Division,
Sasaram,
4. The Sub Divisional Officer, Bikramganj at
Bikramganj,
5. The Circle Office, Bikramganj at Bikramganj,
District- Rohtas,
6. The Director, Land Acquisition, Bihar at
Patna.....
.....Respondents
-----------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Binod Bihari Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Samendra, S.C. 21,
Mr. Manager Sah, A.C to S.C-21
........................
9 16.09.2011At the time of hearing, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has confined his prayer for a direction to the respondents-authorities to grant compensation of 81 decimals of land of R.S. Plot No. 891, R.S. Khata No. 630 of Village Dharupur, regarding which there is a declaration of title and confirmation of possession in his favour by a competent court passed in Title Suit No.97 of 1982 / 61 of 1991 on 16.7.1991. It is also urged that possession of the 2 petitioner's remaining land measuring 1 Acre 96½ decimals of the same plot be restored back to the petitioner.
Learned counsel submitted that the aforesaid land has been utilized by the State Government for construction of the Civil Court building at Bikramganj.
A counter affidavit and two supplementary counter affidavits have been filed on behalf of the State. It has been submitted in the counter affidavit that the land stands recorded as Gairmajarua Malik Parti land in the Cadastral Survey Khatiyan which was vested in the State of Bihar after abolition of zamindari and Revisional Survey Khatiyan has been prepared in the name of Government of Bihar. However, in the second supplementary counter affidavit, filed on behalf of respondent nos. 2, 4 and 5, a letter dated 14.6.2011 written by the District Magistrate-cum Collector, Rohtas (Sasaram) to the respondent no.6, the Director, Land Acquisition, Bihar, Patna, has been brought on record as Annexure (I), wherein a stand has been taken that in Title Suit No.97 of 1982 / 61 of 1991 filed by the petitioner, the civil court of competent jurisdiction has 3 passed a judgment and decree dated 16.7.91 in favour of the petitioner. An appeal was preferred against the aforesaid judgment and decree being Title Appeal No. 79/05, after about 14 years of passing of the judgment and decree alongwith a petition for condoning the delay. The limitation petition was provisionally allowed. However, the matter was challenged by the petitioner in Civil Revision Case No. 239/06 and the aforesaid order was set aside by an order dated 31.10.2006 passed by this Court.
It has been submitted that 81 decimals of land of Mauja Dharupur, Plot No.891 appertaining to Khata No.630 has been utilized for construction of the residential building for the Judicial Officers of Civil Court, Bikramganj. The construction was completed in the year 2004 and on 20.11.06, an affidavit had been filed that there is no need for further construction. It appears from the aforesaid letter that S.L.P. filed by the State before the Supreme Court challenging the order passed by this Court in the civil revision was also summarily dismissed on 19.11.2007. The District Magistrate has requested the Director, Land Acquisition, 4 Bihar, Patna to give guidelines for making payment of compensation amount of 81 decimals of land on the point as to whether the payment should be made on the market value as existing on 14.9.2004 i.e., the date on which the application for mutation has been filed by the petitioner or on the present market value.
The matter has been heard on several occasions. On 14.07.2011, in view of the aforesaid letter written to the Director, Land Acquisition, Bihar, upon the prayer of the petitioner, he was allowed to be impleaded as party-respondent in this case and State was granted one week's time for seeking instruction with regard to the action taken by the Director, Land Acquisition upon the aforesaid letter dated 14.6.2011 written by the District Magistrate. This case was again taken up on 22.07.2011, and it was submitted on behalf of the State that the process has been initiated for grant of compensation to the petitioner and file has been submitted before the competent authority. Thus, upon the prayer on behalf of the State, four weeks time was granted. Again the matter was taken up on 25.08.2011 and in view of the fact that no affidavit could be filed on 5 behalf of the Director, Land Acquisition, Bihar, Patna , by way of last indulgence, two weeks' further time was granted to the State for the said purpose.
Today also, when the matter is taken up, it has been submitted on behalf of the State that counter affidavit has not been filed for the reason that he has not received any instruction, thus, this Court has no option but to proceed, consider and decide this case even in the absence of the counter affidavit on behalf of respondent no.6.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon a decision of a Single Judge of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 4356 of 2005 disposed of on 19.09.2005, in an identical case, however filed by other persons.
The relevant passage of the order passed in the aforesaid writ application is quoted as under:
"Be that as it may, the Collector, Rohtas at Sasaram is directed to look at the decree, a copy of which shall be furnished by the petitioners along with a copy of this order to the Collector, Rohtas at Sasaram, who shall thereupon ascertain whether any part of that land has been acquired, and if not he is directed to locate that land through Revenue Department and hand over 6 peaceful possession thereof to the petitioner after removal of encroachments therefrom. If he finds that the suit land in its entirety has been acquired, he must communicate the same to the petitioner in writing giving full particulars of the acquisition. If he finds that a part of that land had been acquired, while he shall furnish informations in relation thereto in the same manner to the petitioners, locate by demarcation the remaining part which has not been acquired and hand over possession thereof to the petitioners. In the event, it is contended by the Collector that the land in its entirety or in part has been acquired, it shall be open to the petitioners to take such steps as they may be advised in accordance with law.
If it is found that the land being the subject matter of the decree, on any part thereof has been used for any public purpose, but without acquisition, the Collector shall while furnishing the reasons pass an award under the Land Acquisition Act after obtaining appropriate permission of the State Government and shall pay compensation in terms of the award to the petitioners, and in such case, the requirement of issuance of notice under Section 4 and declaration under Section 6 shall stand dispensed with."
However, in the present case, from the letter as contained in Annexure (I) to the second supplementary counter affidavit, it is apparent that the Collector concerned has already accepted that 81 decimals of land appertaining to Plot No.891, Khata No.630 of Mauja 7 Dharupur belongs to the petitioner as per the decree passed in Title Suit No.97 of 1982 / 61of 1991 and the same has been utilized without any acquisition proceeding having been initiated for the purpose and the petitioner had already filed an application before the competent authority for mutation of his name with regard to 2.77½ Acres of land which has been declared to be in possession of the petitioner. However, the Collector has already requested the Director, Land Acquisition, Bihar, Patna to decide as to whether the petitioner should be given compensation at the present market value or at the market value which was prevalent at the time of filing of the application for mutation by the petitioner i.e. on 14.9.2004.
In above view of the matter, this case stands allowed in terms of the order dated 19.09.2005 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 4356 of 2005 as contained in Annexure-5 of the reply to the counter affidavit. If it is found that the land being the subject matter of the decree, as aforesaid or any part thereof has been used for any public purpose, but without acquisition, the Collector shall while furnishing the reasons pass an award under the 8 Land Acquisition Act after obtaining appropriate permission of the State Government and pay necessary award in accordance with the provisions as contained under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and while doing so, he would also consider as to whether the case of the petitioner would be covered under the Rehabilitation Policy of the State Government which was made effective from 19.02.2007. The whole exercise should be completed within four months from the date of receipt/production of a certified copy of this order.
In view of the fact that the possession has admittedly being taken over upon 81 decimals of land of the petitioner as admitted by respondent no.2 in the second supplementary counter affidavit, there would be no requirement for issuance of notice under Section 4 and declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. So far the remaining land out of a total of 2.77 ½ acres is concerned, since a petition has been filed by the petitioner for mutation of the land in view of the judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No. 97 of 1982 / 61of 1991, the same should be disposed of by respondent no. 5. i.e., the Circle Officer, Bikramganj, 9 District- Rohtas in accordance with law within four months from the receipt/production of a certified copy of this order.
Accordingly, this writ application stands allowed.
Sanjay-II ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)