High CourtsSingle Bench

Md. Sakir vs State Of Bihar And Ors

Patna High Court · Decided on 20 January 2020 · Citation: (2020) 01 PAT CK 0290

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Right To Fair Compensation And Transparency In Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation And Resettlement Act, 2013 — Section 11(1), 51, 64
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 866 Of 2020
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 435 words
1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AC to GP 18 for the State.

2.

The petitioner has moved the Court for the following reliefs:

"(a) To direct the respondents to make enchance payment of land of the petitioner at residential rate which has been acquired by the respondents for the purpose of Project Araria-Galgal New B.G. Rail Line in the light of State Government decision vide letter no. 5021 dated 18.12.2017.

(b) To direct the respondent to make payment as per primary notification issued by government under section 11(i) of L.A.R.R. Act, 2013 wherein the nature of land is shown residential however compensation has been paid as agricultures.

(c) To direct the District Magistrate, Kishanganj to refer the matter of the petitioner Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority, Purnia for settlement of the claim of petitioner.

(d) To grant any other relief-reliefs for which the petitioner is entitled under the facts and circumstances of the present writ petition."

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that his compensation has been wrongly fixed treating his land to be agricultural even though in the initial notification issued by the State Government under Section 11(1) of the Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), it was shown as residential. It was submitted that the petitioner has already raised objection before the respondent no. 3 on 17.01.2019, which is required to be forwarded to the Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority (hereinafter referred to as the 'Authority') established under Section 51 of the Act.

4.

Learned counsel for the State submitted that such representation has to be made before the Collector under Section 64 of the Act.

5.

Faced with the situation, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the writ petition be disposed off with liberty to him to file a fresh application before the Collector under the Act, if not already done, who may be directed to refer the same to the Authority.

6.

In view thereof, the writ petition stands disposed off with liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate application before the Collector under the Act, if not already done, with regard to his present grievance. If the same is done within two weeks from today, the respondent no. 2 shall refer the matter to the Authority for consideration within three weeks from the date of filing of such representation. If such representation has already been filed, the same shall be referred to the Authority within three weeks from the date of production of a copy of the order before the Collector under the Act.