IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.153 of 2010 BIR BAHADUR RAI @ BIHARI DAS SON OF LATE SHEO BARAI RAI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BHARAULI, P.O- BHARAULI, P.S- ANDAR, DISTT- SIWAN . . . . . . . PETITIONER – APPELLANT. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SIWAN. 3. THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, P.O.+P.S.+DISTT- SIWAN. 4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, TUBE WELL, P.O + P.S + DISTT- SIWAN. 5. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, ANDAR, P.O+P.S- ANDAR, DISTT- SIWAN. 6. OVERSEER, TUBE WELL, P.O+P.S- ANDAR, DISTT- SIWAN. . . . . . . . RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS. For the Appellant : Mr. Bipin Bihari Singh, Adv. : Mr. Upendra Kumar Choubey, Adv. ----------- 2/ 25.01.2011 The appellant has preferred this appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the High Court of Judicature at Patna, against the order dated 24.11.2009, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 7029 of 2008, whereby his prayer for grant of compensation was rejected by the learned Single Judge. Before we deal with the issue involved in this appeal, it would be necessary to notice the facts of the case in some detail. A land acquisition proceeding was initiated in the year 1967 for acquiring several lands including 0.32 decimals of land of the appellant of Plot nos. 789, 795 and 838 of khata no. 286, Plot no. 786 of khata no. 196, Plot nos. 888, 785 and 793 of khata no. 266 in Mauza Bharaualli, Anchal Ander. It would appear from the counter affidavit that the Department did not release the money required for payment of compensation to the petitioner, hence the process of Land Acquisition lapsed mid way. In paragraph 10 of the counter 2 affidavit, the State has submitted that the lands appertaining to aforementioned plots and khatas of Mauza Bharauli was not ultimately acquired, hence there was no question of any payment of compensation of the land in question. The grievance of the appellant is that though the Land Acquisition Proceeding lapsed in the mid way, still the land in question was not released to him. It appears that subsequently, there was a need of Public Road in village Bharauli. The case of the respondents State is that petitioner and other villagers donated their land for construction of village road measuring 20 feet wide. Counsel for the appellant states that he never consented to give his land for construction of Public road in the village. Furthermore, no chit of paper has been filed with the counter affidavit to show that the appellant had consented to give his land for construction of Public road in the village. This Court by order dated 13.05.2009 observed that if a raiyati land of any person is needed to be utilized by the State or it’s departments, it can be done only through process of acquisition, as provided under the Land Acquisition Act. There is no other provision for utilizing private lands by the State and it’s Departments. From perusal of the record, we are satisfied that the State has brought nothing on the record to show that the petitioner had consented to give alleged land measuring 0.32 decimals for construction of the Public road. It is an admitted position that a road has been constructed on the land of the appellant without initiating 3 a proceeding under the Land Acquisition Act. Land of a farmer is the only source of his livelihood. Deprivation of same without adequate compensation by State would not only infringe his right to property, but would almost tantamount to depriving him of his livelihood. In such circumstances, we direct the Collector, Siwan to initiate a Land Acquisition Proceeding and pay compensation to the land owner in terms of Sections 9 and 11 of the Land Acquisition Act within a period of six months from the receipt of a copy of this order. With the aforesaid direction, this appeal is allowed. There will be no order as to costs. Uday/ (S.K. Katriar, J.) (S. P. Singh, J.)