IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7439 of 2008 SUMITRA DEVI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 5 13.10.2009. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner is permitted to add the Executive engineer, Ganga Bridge Authority, Guljarbagh as respondent no.6. The petitioner prays for payment of compensation in lieu of acquisition of 0.123 acres of land of Municipal Survey plot no. 3153 in Mouza Sandalpur, Patna City, Thana no. 11, District Patna, as ordered by Land Acquisition Judge in LA case no. 20 of 1970-71 vide order dated 19.1.1979. Pursuant to notification under section 4 and declaration under section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, land of the petitioner was acquired by the State Government for Ganga Bridge project, Gulzarbagh. He submits that in view of acquisition the remaining portion of land of the plot has also become unfit for any worthwhile use. However only a meager compensation of Rs.2156.25 was awarded to her late husband, namely, Hari Narayan Lal, resident of Tripolia, Patna. As the compensation was too low and inadequate, her husband approached for a reference u/s 18 and 30 of Land Acquisition Act. The Collector on 26.6.1973, vide annexure 1 made reference to Land acquisition judge, Patna whichwas registered as Land Acquisition case no. 284/73. The Special Land acquisition judge awarded further compensation of Rs. 4481.54 with future interest @ 6% pendentelite. A copy of award of compensation by Special land acquisition judge dated - 2 - 19.1.1974 is contained in annexure 3. Petitioner’s husband thereafter moved this court in First Appeal No. 353 of 1974, which was dismissed for non compliance of order dated 4.7.1980. He then filed MJC No. 361/1980 for restoration of appeal which failed. In the meantime, he died leaving behind petitioner with four daughters and two sons mentioned in para 11 of the writ petition. The petitioner states that respondents have made immense delay in paying compensation. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State in which the facts of the case have not been denied rather respondents in para 5 have admitted that the Land acquisition judge ordered for payment of Rs.4481.54 with interest pendentelite @ 6 % with effect from 20.1.1974. In para 6 it has been stated that the Land Acquisition Officer had sent a requisition to the Requisitioning authority, namely, Executive engineer, Ganga Bridge Authority, Gulzarbagh, Patna, respondent no.6 for depositing amount of Rs.12509.52 as per order of Special judge passed in LA case no. 284 of 1973 through letter no. 682/LA dated 4.7.2009 due to be paid upto 30.7.2009. It has further been stated in para 6 that if there is any delay in payment of aforesaid amount, interest @ 6 % will be paid till the date of payment of amount. It has been further stated that so far as unacquired land is concerned, the petitioner is free to make construction and utilize the same. It appears that authorities have not made payment of compensation as awarded by Land Acquisition Judge way back on - 3 - 20.1.1974. The learned judge awarded 6% interest, as same was conceived adequate in 1974. The value of money has depreciated over 35 years and 6% simple interest would not be adequate to maintain the initial value of compensation amount ordered in 1974. In other words, the petitioner would be receiving hardly a higher amount in real value even with 6% interest over 35 years. The writ petition was filed on 6.5.2008, still compensation money has not been paid. Thus I direct the respondents to pay interest at the rate 9% simple interest on due amount from date of filing of this writ petition. The writ petition stands disposed of with aforesaid directions. Shashi. (Samarendra Pratap Singh,J.)