IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No.1252 of 2010 IN CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No. 4230 of 2000 WITH INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION No.7059 of 2010 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No.1252 of 2010 ==================================================== 1. Shahwar Zarreen, daughter of Late Mumtaz Kadri, at present resident of House No. 137, Ashoka Main Sector 34, Haryana. 2. Rana Noor, daughter of Late Mumtaz Kadri, at present of Vatika green Valley, 6/1 Pardih Road, Mango, Jharkhand. Both permanent resident of Mohalla-New Karimganj, P.S.-Civil Lines, Town and District-Gaya. …. …. Petitioners/Appellants Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. 2. The Collector-cum-District Collector, Gaya. 3. The Additional Collector, Gaya. 4. The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Gaya. 5. The Land Acquisition Officer, Gaya. 6. Nikhat Nigar, wife of Shamim Anwar Quadri, resident of Mohalla- New Karimganj, P.S.-Civil Lines, Town and District-Gaya, at present residing at Quarter No.2/159, Vikas Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow. 7. Ghazala Naz, wife of Akhtar Quadri, resident of Mohalla- New Karimganj, P.S.-Civil Lines, Town and District-Gaya, at present residing at 1283/34C, Chandigarh. …. …. Respondents/Respondents ==================================================== Appearance : For the Appellants : Mr. Satish Chandra Mishra, Advocate Mr. Md.Bahauddin, Advocate For the State: Mr. Lalit Kishore, A.A.G.-3 ==================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN) - 2 - 2. 20.8.2010. Letters Patent Appeal No. 1252 of 2010 with Interlocutory Application No. 7059 of 2010:- Heard learned counsel for the parties on limitation as well as on the admission of the appeal. This letters patent appeal arises out of a judgment and order dated 20th April 2006 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 4230 of 2000, whereby and whereunder the writ petition preferred by the appellants has been dismissed. The facts of the matter briefly stated is, that a land acquisition proceeding bearing Land Acquisition Case No. 1190/62A-99-2000 was initiated by the appropriate authorities under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for acquisition of 2½ decimals of land falling under Plot No.4820 and 4821, Mouza Alamgirpur (Gewal Bigha-White House Compound), Thana No.8, P.S. Rampur, District-Gaya for the public purpose of construction of a road. Following the provisions of the Act a notification was published in the District Gazette under Section 4(1) of the Act on 1st June 1999 and copies of the same were also served on the petitioners on 28th October 1999. The notification was followed by a declaration under Section 6 of the Act, which was published in the District Gazette on 6th December 1999 as also in the local dailies. In between the proceedings, the writ petitioners chose to challenge the same before this Court giving rise to C.W.J.C. No. 4230 of 2000. While the matter was pending consideration before this Court the acquisition - 3 - proceedings culminated in an award published under Section 12(2) of the Act, which was prepared on 12th November 2001. The quantum of compensation was determined at Rs.1,20,461.25. A copy of the award was served upon the father of the petitioners, who did not choose to receive the same and consequent whereto the awards were pasted on the house. With the preparation and the service of the award followed by the determination of the compensation amount and communication thereof to the father of the petitioners, the respondents discharged their obligation under the Act and the acquisition proceedings stood concluded. It is necessary to mention here that at no stage of proceeding did either the petitioners or their father chose to object to the proceedings whether at the stage of issuance of notification or at the stage of preparation of the award or determination of the quantum of compensation under the Act. With the publication of the award on 12th November 2001, the proceedings concluded. The writ petition preferred by the petitioners came-up for consideration on 20th April 2006 when none appeared on behalf of the petitioners to press the writ petition. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that as the concerned Advocate had shifted his practice, hence this situation. Nonetheless, the situation does demonstrate that the petitioners were neither vigilant at the stage of acquisition proceeding nor at the stage of - 4 - proceeding before this Court. The learned single Judge considering the circumstances accompanying the proceeding dismissed the writ petition. We have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the materials available on the record of the proceeding and we find no reason to differ with the opinion expressed by the learned single Judge. The delay is condoned and the appeal is dismissed. Pawan/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Jyoti Saran, J)