IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5894 of 2017 ====================================================== Sunil Kumar Singh Son of late Ram Naresh Singh Resident of Singh Kothi, Old G.T. Road, P.O. , P.S. Town and District Aurangabad. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Director of Land Acquisition, Government of Bihar, Main Secretariat, Patna. 3. The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna. 4. The Executive Engineer, Building Construction Department, Aurangabad, Bihar. 5. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Aurangabad, Bihar. 6. The District Magistrate and Collector, Aurangabad, Bihar. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, Sr. Advocate Mr. Manu Tripurari, Advocate Mr. Apurv Harsh, Advocate Ms. Jaya Singh, Advocate Mr. Raghu Raj Pratap Singh, Advocate Ms. Aditi Sahay, Advocate Mr. Hritik Anand, Advocate Mr. Astitva, Advocate Mr. Pranshu Prakash, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rishi Raj Sinha-SC-19 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 2 16-05-2025 Heard Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The present application is filed for the following reliefs:- (i) for a declaration that the land acquisition proceedings being L.A. Case No. 20/72-73 initiated under the “Land Acquisition Act, 1894” shall be deemed to have lapsed in view of section 24(2) of Patna High Court CWJC No.5894 of 2017(2) dt.16-05-2025 2/11 Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, Resettlement Act, 2013; (ii) for a direction to the respondents to withdraw from the acquisition of the petitioner's land admeasuring 0.75 Acre comprised in Khata No. 26 Khesra No. 307 of which physical possession has never been taken; (iii) for a direction to the respondents to de-notify the aforesaid land from the aforesaid land acquisition proceeding and further to release the aforesaid land in favour of the petitioner; and/or for any other relief(s) for which the petitioner may be found entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 3. 3. The facts as mentioned in writ petition is/are as follows:- On 11.08.1972, a declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (henceforth for short 'the Act') was published in the official gazette issued by the Department of Revenue (Acquisition Section), Bihar (henceforth for short 'the Department') with a proposal for construction of Rajkiya Kanya Madhya Vidyalaya, Aurangabad (henceforth for short 'the School') (Annexure-1 to the writ petition). 4. It is the contention of the petitioner that it included a piece of his ancestral land recorded as follows: Patna High Court CWJC No.5894 of 2017(2) dt.16-05-2025 3/11 Khata No. 26, Khesra No. 307, Thana No. 560, Aurangabad (Area-0.75 decimal). It is the further case of the petitioner that the land always remained in his peaceful physical possession and the revenue receipts were also continuously issued in his favour. 5. The contention is that 'the School', however, came to be constructed at a different place at Dharnidhar Road, Aurangabad and the land in question remained unused. 6. The further stand of the petitioner is that the letter no. 123 dated 12.01.1979 issued by the State of Bihar, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Bihar, Patna records that if the acquired land remains unused, the same can be returned to the land owners. The said letter no. 123 dated 12.01.1979 read as follows:- [i= la0 123 Mh0 ,y0 ,0 uhfr&1@78 fn0 12-1-1979] [izs’kd& v:i dqekj clq] ljdkj ds fo”ks’k lfpo] lsok esa] lHkh lekgrkZ@lHkh mik;qDrA fo"k;%& Hkw&vtZu vf/kfu;e] 1894 ds vUrxZr vftZr Hkwfe dh vf/klwfpr iz;kstu ds fy, vko ;drk u gksus ij ” okilhA funs”kkuqlkj eq>s dguk gS fd gky ds dbZ ,d ,sls mnkgj.k ls ljdkj fpfUrr gks jgh gS fd tgka vf/k;kph foHkkx ;k izkf/kdkjh o"kksZa igys dkQh tehu fdlh fo”ks"k mn~ns”; ls Hkw&vtZu vf/kfu;e] 1894 ds vUrxZr] vf/kdka”kr% vkifRr izfdz;k ls vftZr djok dj] vc mldh vko”;drk ugha gS dgrs gq, nwljs izfr’Bku ;k foHkkx ds lkFk cUnkscLr djus ds Patna High Court CWJC No.5894 of 2017(2) dt.16-05-2025 4/11 fy, ljdkj ls vuqjks/k dj jgs gSaA ,sls ekeyksa esa ljdkj dh xgjh fpUrk dk fo”ks’k dkj.k eq[;r% ;g gS fd xjhc fdlkuksa dh tehu dks] vtZu ds ckn] yEcs vjlksa rd csdkj NksM+ j[kus ls fdlkuksa dh ijs”kkuh ds vykos [kk|kUu ds mRiknu esa deh ls Hkkjh jk’Vªh; Nfr Hkh gksrh gSA buds vfrfjDr] ljdkj vftZr Hkqfe ds bl izdkj ds ysu&nsus dks uSfrd n`f’Vdks.k ls leFkZu;ksX; ;k vkSfpR;iw.kZ ugha le>rh gS] D;ksafd fdlh fo”ks’k yksdfgr dk iz;kstu crkrs gq, fdlh tehu dks vftZr dj] ckn esa mldk ml yksd iz;kstu ds fy, mi;ksx ugha dj nwljs mn~ns”; ls cUnkscLr djus dh ckr dks ljdkj lEc) Hkw&Lokfe;ksa dks /kks[kk nsuk le>rh gSA ;g Li’Vr% xSj&dkuwuh dke Hkh gSA okLro esa] ftl foHkkx ds fy, Hkwfe dk vtZu fd;k tkrk gS] ml foHkkx dks] mldh vko”;drk ugha jgus ij] ,slh tehu dks nwljs fdlh dks gLrkUrfjr djus] ;k nwljs fdlh ds lkFk cUnkscLr djus dk dksbZ vf/kdkj ugha gSA fu;e nwcFkZghu :i ls Li’V gS fd yksd iz;kstu ds fo”ks’k mn~ns”; ls vftZr Hkwfe tc vf/k;kph foHkkx dks] vko”;d ugha gS] rks ,slh tehu dks mUgsa izR;kfir (relinquish) dj nsuk gS vkSj rnksijkUr ,slh Hkwfe dk fu’iknu jktLo foHkkx }kjk gh fd;k tkuk gSA 2- jkT; ljdkj us ,sls ekeyksa dh c<+rh gqbZ la[;k dks ns[krs gq, ;g uhfrxr fu.kZ; ysus dh d`ik dh gS fd tc fdlh foHkkx dks fdlh yksd iz;kstu ds fy, vftZr Hkwfe dh vko”;drk ugha jgsxh rks ,slh vfrfjDr ¼ljIkyl½ Hkwfe dks og foHkkx jktLo foHkkx dks vkSipkfjd :i ls okil dj nsxk] ,slh Hkwfe ds uD”kk ,oa [ksljk uEcj vkfn lkjs fooj.k ds lkFkA jktLo foHkkx lHkh ljdkjh foHkkx] ftuesa jkT; ljdkj ,oa dsUnzh; ljdkj nksuksa vkSj ljdkj ds fu;a=.kk/khu yksd mn~;e ;k midze Hkh gksaxs] ,slh Hkwfe dh vko”;drk ds ckjs esa iwN&rkN djus ds ckn] ;fn fdlh dh vko”;drk ugha gks rks] Hkwfe dks HkwriwoZ Hkw&Lokfe;ksa dks okil dj nsxkA bl chp HkwriwoZ Hkw&Lokeh ds nsgkUr gksus ij tehu muds mRrjkf/kdkfj;ksa dks okil dj nh tk,xhA ,slh n”kk esa okil dh tkus okyh tehu Patna High Court CWJC No.5894 of 2017(2) dt.16-05-2025 5/11 ds fy, ,sls jS;rksa ls mruh jkf”k yh tk;sxh ftruh ml Hkwfe vtZu ds le; mUgsa vf/kfu;e 1894 ds vUrxZr eqvkotk ds :i esa] Hkqxrku fd;k x;k FkkA lkFk gh] ykSVk;h x;h tehu ij muds iwoZ esa dk”rdkjh vf/kdkj ¼VsusUlh jkbV½ Fkk] ogh jgsxk ,oa Hkw&vtZu ds QyLo:i tks yxku dk U;wuhdj.k fd;k x;k Fkk] og yxku fQj ls muds [kkrs esa tksM+ fn;k tk,xkA 3- vuqjks/k gS fd Hkfo’; esa fdlh Hkh foHkkx ;k vf/k;kph izkf/kdkjh ds }kjk vfrfjDr vftZr Hkwfe okil djus ds ekeyksa esa iwoZxkeh dafMdk esa fn, x, funs”kkuqlkj vko”;d dkjZokbZ djus dh d`ik djsaA jkT; ds bl uhfr laca/kh fu.kZ; ls vkids ftyk ds lHkh foHkkx ds inkf/kdkfj;ksa dks d`i;k voxr djk;k tk;A 7. The contention as explained/submitted by the learned Senior Counsel is that since they were in continuous peaceful physical possession of the land in question and the State of Bihar never took it back nor they got/ received any compensation, the authorities were regularly approached, persuant thereto, the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Aurangabad vide his office letter no. 76 dated 16.07.2004 addressed to 'the Department' informed that the amount has not been received by the original land holder and the representation has been received by his son (the petitioner herein). It has been further informed by the Executive Engineer, Building Division, Aurangabad that the land is not needed as 'the School' building has come up at other place, the direction of Education Department is not required in this connection for the release of the land and in that background, steps can be taken for its Patna High Court CWJC No.5894 of 2017(2) dt.16-05-2025 6/11 release under Section 48 of the Land Acquisition Act (Annexure-8 to the writ petition). 8. Learned Senior Counsel submits that despite the said positive communication by the District Magistrate-cum- Collector, Aurangabad and repeated representations by the petitioner, the decision has still not been taken by 'the Department'. 9. He submits that later, in the year 2006 also, under the joint signature of the Collector, Aurangabad, the Additional Collector, Aurangabad as well as District Land Acquisition Officer, Aurangabad vide memo no. 93 dated 11.10.2006, a direction was given to put a notice on the offices of the District Collectorate, Civil Court, Zila Parishad, Nagar Parishad as also the Sub-Divisional Office as to whether the land is required for any other public purpose by either the State Government Departments, Corporations or Central Government Undertakings or not. (Annexure-6 to the writ petition) 10. He submits that even thereafter, no such proposal came and in that background, it is clear that the unutilized land which is still in the family's physical possession, a decision is warranted from the side of the respondents which they have failed to do till date. Patna High Court CWJC No.5894 of 2017(2) dt.16-05-2025 7/11 11. In support of the claim of the petitioner, the learned Senior Counsel has taken this Court to an order of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Another Vs. Bimal Kumar Shah and Others reported in (2024) 10 SCC 533 with special reference to para 33.7. which reads as follows: 33.7. The Right of Conclusion 33.7.1. Upon conclusion of process of acquisition and payment of compensation, the State takes possession of the property in normal circumstances. The culmination of an acquistion process is not in the payment of compensation, but also in taking over the actual physical possession of the land. If possession is not taken, acquisition is not complete. With the taking over of actual possession after the normal procedures of acquisition, the private holding is divested and the right, title and interest in the property, or its beneficiary's right, title and interest in the property is inconclusive and causes lot of difficulties. The obligation to conclude and complete the process of acquisition is also part of Article 300-A. 12. It is to be noted that the matter was taken up by a co-ordinate bench on 13.09.2018 and the same was adjourned directing the respondents to file counter affidavit. As the order recorded that the matter is to be listed after filing of the counter affidavit, neither the writ petition could see the light of the day for seven long years nor the State chose to file any affidavit. 13. It is only in this month that a short affidavit has Patna High Court CWJC No.5894 of 2017(2) dt.16-05-2025 8/11 come on behalf of the District Collectorate in which the stand has been taken as submitted by the learned State counsel that the matter is old one, the physical possession of the land was delivered to the requisitioning Department (the Education Department) and after decades, no relief can be granted. 14. The State in paragraph-13 of the counter affidavit states that they have delivered the physical possession of the land to the requisitioning Department on 25.09.1981. Para 13 read as follows: 13. That it is humbly submitted that after completion of process of acquisition under the Act, the physical possession over the acquired land in question was delivered to the requisitioning department on 25.09.1981. 15. The reply to the counter affidavit has also come on the record and para 11 of the rejoinder read as follows: 11. That it is humbly submitted that the averments made in Para 13 is denied as false and unsubstantiated. The Respondents have failed to bring on record any document in support of possession being delivered of the land in question on 25.09.1981. On the contrary, the petitioner has been in continued possession of the said land and the revenue receipts/Jamabandi continue in his name. Even on present date the petitioner possess the L.P.C. and paying rent to the government. Patna High Court CWJC No.5894 of 2017(2) dt.16-05-2025 9/11 16. Having heard the parties and perusing the records of the case, the following points have come up for consideration which are as follows: (i) the land in question was acquired for the construction of a Girls School; (ii) the compensation amount was not paid/received by the petitioner's father; (iii) the Girls School now stand at Dharnidhar Road, Aurangabad; (iv) the land is not required for any other public purpose by any Department/Corporation/Central Government despite the notices published; (v) despite the positive recommendation of the Collector, Aurangabad, the Department has chosen not to take the final decision. 17. While filing the counter affidavit after seven long years, that too at the District level and not by 'the Department', the respondents chose not to catagorically deny the contention in the paragraph 20 of the writ petition made by the petitioner that till date, neither physical possession has been taken nor compensation paid/received. As recorded above, 'the Department' failed to file any reply. Patna High Court CWJC No.5894 of 2017(2) dt.16-05-2025 10/11 18. The facts have been recorded, the petitioner has based his claim on the basis of letter no. 123 dated 12.01.1979 issued by 'the Department', as recorded above, the same has not been commented upon by the respondent in its counter affidavit. A valid point has been put forward by the learned Senior Counsel that the land which is in their possession, remains unsued, the physical possession is with them and there is recommendation of the Collector, Aurangabad which need immediate consideration by 'the Department'. 19. Annexure-11 Series of the reply to the counter affidavit shows the Land Possession Certificate (LPC) is still running in the name of the petitioner as issued on 23.04.2025. 20. This Court has also taken note of the order of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kolkata Municipal Corporation (supra) wherein it has recorded that when the actual possession has not been taken, the acquisition is not completed. 21. As recorded above, despite passage of seven long years after the writ petition was filed, the respondent nos. 1 to 3 failed to file counter affidavit. This Court, in that background, has two options; either to adjourn the matter after imposing cost on 'the Department' for their failure to file reply and/or to direct it to take a decision at an earliest. Patna High Court CWJC No.5894 of 2017(2) dt.16-05-2025 11/11 22. Since the matter is of the year 2017, this Court with the consent of parties intends to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: (i) the petitioner shall be prefering a fresh application along with all the connecting/supporting documents/Annexures before the respondent no. 1, the Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Patna, Bihar within next two weeks; (ii) on the receipt of the said petition with documents supporting the case, the respondent no. 1 shall be taking up the matter and after noticing all the necessary parties, and hearing them/perusing the records shall take the matter to its logical conclusion preferably within a period of three months from the date, the petitioner files the fresh petition. 23. The writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid observation. No cost. priyanka/- (Rajiv Roy, J) U