IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15909 of 2005 MOSTT.PARWATI KUER, WIFE OF LATE RAJDEO SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE DHARUPUR, P.S. BIKRAMGANJ, DISTRICT ROHTAS. --- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE COLLECTOR, ROHTAS AT SASARAM 3. THE DISTRICT LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, ROHTAS AT SASARAM 4. HIRAJHHARI KUER, WIFE OF LATE KEDAR SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RAIPUR CHORE, P.S. SHEO SAGAR, DISTRICT ROHTAS 5. SMT. PANNA DEVI, WIFE OF SRI RAM PRAVESH SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHECHARI, P.S. OBRA, DISTRICT AURANGABAD. --- RESPONDENTS. For the petitioner :- Mr. Vind Bihari Singh, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Anshuman Singh, A.C. to A.A.G. III For the Railways :- Mr. D.K. Sinha, Sr. Advocate Mr. Bijoy Kr. Sinha, Advocate ----------- 3 6.7.2010 The petitioner has challenged the order passed by the District Land Acquisition Officer, Rohtas at Sasaram on 25.4.2005 in Case No. 24(V) of 2005 under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The facts are that the petitioner claims that her father-in- law namely Ram Ganesh Singh (Ram Naresh Singh) had executed a will in her favour on 19.6.1984. After the death of Ram Ganesh Singh the petitioner filed Probate Case No. 3 of 2004 which was dismissed for non-compliance of certain orders. The petitioner thereafter filed Miscellaneous Case No. 4 of 2004 to restore Probate Case No. 3 of 2004 which is still pending in the Court below before the A.D.J. VII, Sasaram. At the time when the order was passed by the Collector, the Miscellaneous Case had not been admitted. The case of the opposite parties is that they are the daughters of Ram Ganesh Singh and that the opposite party is the widowed daughter-in-law who has managed some how to create a 2 document by which the father-in-law has given the property in the land acquisition proceeding to her. Once the miscellaneous case has been admitted and the private respondent nos. 4 and 5 have appeared in the case, it would be proper that the matter should be referred under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act to the judge to decide the question of entitlement with respect to grant and withdrawal of the award. It would also be advisable for respondent nos. 4 and 5 to pursue and hurry up the miscellaneous case 4 of 2004. The petitioner should also co-operate with the Court, as ultimately the award money will depend upon the result of the probate case and the Misc. case. Otherwise perhaps the petitioner will only be entitled to certain share of the family property by way of inheritance. These questions however, will be addressed and answered by the reference Court. The Collector, Rohtas at Sasaram is directed to refer the matter within a period of six weeks on receipt/production of a copy of this order in Land Acquisition Case No. 24(V) of 2005. This application is disposed of in the terms aforesaid. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)