High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Brahmadeo Yadav vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors on 13 July, 2010

Patna High Court – Orders
Brahmadeo Yadav vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors on 13 July, 2010
                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                             CWJC No.16920 of 2007
BRAHMADEO YADAV, SON OF SRI HRIDAYA NARAYAN YADAV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SABAILA,
P.S. SINGHESHWAR ASTHAN, DISTRICT MADHEPURA.             ---- PETITIONER
                                     Versus
   1. THE STATE OF BIHAR.
   2. THE ADDITIONAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND LAND REFORMS
      DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA.
   3. THE COLLECTOR, MADHEPURA.
   4. THE ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR, MADHEPURA.
   5. THE DISTRICT LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, MADHEPURA. ---- RESPONDENTS
                                  -----------

6 13.7.2010 The petitioner has filed this writ application for deleting

lands of Mouja Gajarhat, Khesra No. 1716 (Part) measuring an area of

1.93 acres out of 2.8 acres, Khesra No. 1718 (Part) measuring an area

of 33 decimals out of 40 decimals, Khesra No. 1719 (Part) measuring

an area of 77 decimals out of 86 decimals and Khesra No. 1720 (Part)

measuring an area of 1.08 acres out of 3.50 acres from the notification

under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act.

A counter affidavit has been filed in which it has been

categorically stated that the lands of the petitioner cannot be deleted

from the acquisition proceeding on the ground that they form part of

chunk of lands which has been acquired for the B.N. Mandal

University and the lands of the petitioner fall in the centre of the

chunk of land acquired. It is true that some lands have been deleted

from the acquisition proceeding but those lands have fall on the

periphery on the boundary of the chunk of land which has to be

acquired. Parts of petitioner’s land have in fact been excluded which

from acquisition, would be apparent from paragraph nos. 8 and 9 of

the counter affidavit. I find that reasons for not exempting the

petitioner’s land is fair and quite reasonable; as such the prayer
2

regarding exemption is dismissed

The petitioner has raised some other issues as well.

Such issues may be raised at the appropriate stage of Land Acquisition

Proceeding. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the order.

This application is dismissed.

Sanjay                                      (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)