IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4457 of 2008 ANAND MOHAN MISHRA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 3. 15.04.2009 Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the state. Two counter affidavits have been filed on behalf of the state, one on behalf of the Executive Officer, Tirhut Canal Division and the other on behalf the District Land Acquisition Officer, East Champaran, Motihari. The matter of dispute is construction of boundary wall over the land bearing Khata No. 108, Plot No. 456, Revenue Thana No. 50 of Motihari Sub Division, measuring 23 decimals. There is no dispute regarding this fact that the land was acquired in the year, 1977 under the Land Acquisition Act for construction of the Staff Colony of Tirhut Canal division No.-1. From the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Land Acquisition Officer, it transpires that the proceeding of land acquisition has completed in the year, 1978. An objection was filed by father of the petitioner in the year, 1977 which was time barred , as such, it was not considered. So far compensation amount is concerned, that was deposited in the civil deposit and still that has not been paid. Apart from that, the present dispute relates to re-construction of the boundary wall which according to the petitioner is beyond the limit to which acquisition was made. Petitioner’s case is that after family partition, that part of - 2 - the land fell in his share and without any notice; such boundary wall is being prepared. The question is whether the matter relates to the Land Acquisition proceeding or it can be considered under the Public Land Encroachment Act. The petitioner is directed to file his objection before the Collector, East Champaran, Motihari. In case such an objection is filed by the petitioner, it should be considered in accordance with law and disposed of within three months from the date of filing such application. This writ application is disposed of. akv (Mridula Mishra, J.)