IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1291 of 2011
Durganand Mishra & Ors
Versus
The State Of Bihar & Ors.
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6331 of 2011
Vijay Kumar Mishra & Anr
Versus
The State Of Bihar & Ors
7 14.9.2011
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners in the
contempt matter.
This petitioners of the contempt petition have
come to this court for initiating a contempt proceeding for
non-compliance of the order passed in CWJC No.
15938/2010.
The writ petition being CWJC No. 6331/2011 has
been filed for quashing the order, dated 28.3.2011by which the
writ petitioners have been asked to deposit the award amount
granted in lieu of the acquisition of 67.3865 decimals of land
which amounts to Rs. 60,44,577/-. Apparently the petitioners
of both the cases have been filing writ petition in this court
without explaining all the facts and bringing to the notice of
the court that there is an inter-se dispute between the parties.
The writ petitioners have stated that in fact that a suit for
declaration of the title is also pending with respect to the
properties under acquisition.
This court had earlier also passed an order, dated
7.5.2010 that payment should be made only after verification
and due execution of bond by the petitioners or the parties
2
who were receiving the payments of the award amount.
The whole problem has arisen due to piece meal
application of mind by the authorities. In cases where there is
a dispute with respect to title and possession of lands which
are sought to be acquired, the authorities concerned should
ensure that all the parties are heard and thereafter pass an
appropriate order. The order of the court, dated 7.5.2010
passed in CWJC No. 7565/2010 and the order of the court,
dated 6.10.2010 passed in CWJC No. 15938 of 2010 had
specifically directed the competent authority to take steps to
decide the issues in accordance with law after hearing all the
parties. This was not done by the competent authority.
The provisions of the National Highways Act,
1956 envisages that if there is a dispute regarding
apportionment of the money to be paid to the parties
concerned, then the matter may be referred to the competent
civil court. However, since there is a specific order of this
court that the Land Acquisition Officer should at least hear the
parties once to satisfy himself regarding the document of title
with respect to the lands in question, I direct that the Land
Acquisition Officer should decide the matter within a period
of three months on receipt of a copy of this order.
The petitioners of the writ petition and the
contempt petition are directed to produce a copy of this order
before the competent authority.
List these cases under the same heading on
3
4.1.2012.
At this stage I may make it clear that the Land
Acquisition Officer would be free to take assistance of the
Circle Officer or any revenue authority to determine the issue
in question. The earlier findings of the Circle Officer should
be ignored and a de novo enquiry, if necessary, should be held
in this case.
haque ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)