IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.1482 of 2009 1. PATNA DIOCESAN CORPORATION THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT ARCHBISHOP WILLIAM D'SOUZA S.J., S/O LATE ALBERT D’ SOUZA, R/O BISHOP'S HOUSE, BANKIPORE, P.S. PIRBAHORE, DISTT. PATNA ….. PETITIONER/APPELLANT Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. PATNA REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THROUGH VICE CHAIRMAN, PATNA REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MAURYA LOK, PATNA 3. VICE CHAIRMAN, PATNA REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MAURYA LOK COMPLEX, PATNA 4. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, PATNA DISTRICT, PATNA 5. DISTRICT LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, PATNA DISTRICT, PATNA 6. BUDHA GRIH NIRMAN SAHAYOG SAMITI LTD., WITH ITS OFFICES AT BUDHA COLONY, THROUGH THE CHAIRMAN BUDHA GRIH NIRMAN SAHAYOG SAMITI LTD., BUDHA COLONY, P.S. BUDHA COLONY, DISTT. PATNA ….. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS ----------- 03 03.05.2010 We have heard counsel for the appellant and the respondents-State. The writ Court has declined interference with the land acquisition proceedings primarily on the ground of gross and inordinate delay of approximately 45 years in questioning the same. We see no reason to interfere with that part of the judgment. The contention of the appellant is that the compensation has not been paid. The stand of the respondents-State is that the money is lying in the Civil Treasury, and approximately more than 75 other awardees like the present appellant has refused to pick-up the compensation money. The submission that no notice of the award was served under Section 12 of the Land Acquisition 2 Act does not impress the Court. There is a presumption under Section 114 (E) of the Indian Evidence Act that all officials Acts have been done properly and duly in normal course. This presumption is further reinforced from the own stand of the appellant that they had filed their representation before the Collector to the land acquisition proceedings in time based on a publication in the news paper. There is no pleading in the writ application that no award has been published much less that it was not served on the appellant. The appellant is always at liberty to collect the compensation money from the Civil Treasury. In the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, considering that the appellant is a Church society, we consider it proper to expunge the observation against it at page-22 of the judgment and also the costs awarded against the appellant. The appeal is dismissed except to the extent indicated above. P.K. ( Navin Sinha, J.) (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)