IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9649 of 2008 SANJAY RAI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Nil Kamal, Advocate For the respondent nos. 1 to 6: Mr. Rajendra Prasad, A.A.G.I For the Electricity Board: Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, Advocate ------- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dr. Ravi Ranjan ------ Dated, the 7th August, 2008 This writ petition, in the nature of Public Interest Litigation, is wholly misconceived and frivolous. 2. The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: “(i) For that, issue a writ of mandamus, commanding to the respondents and quash the acquisition order, if any, which is against the norms and criteria of the notification letter of Chairman, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna contained as annexure-1 and as well as against the letter of the District Magistrate, Buxar contained as Annexure-2 to this petition. (ii) For that, direct to respondents to acquire the land in question as per the criteria fixed by the respondent authority contained as Annexure-1 and 2 to this petition. (iii) For that, direct to respondent no.2 to dispose of the petition of petitioner contained as annexure-3 and 12 to this petition. (iv) For, restrain to respondents to not acquire the land of petitioner and public of his panchayat against the criteria of Annexures-1 and 2. (v) For that, restrain to respondents to not acquire the land in question till the disposal of application of petitioner contained as Annexure-3 and 12 to this petition.” - 2 - 3. If at all there is acquisition of somebody’s land in contravention of the provisions of law, it is for the expropriated owner to agitate the grievance directly before the Court. Merely because the petitioner happens to be Mukhia, he does not become general power attorney holder of owners of land within his jurisdiction. 4. Needless to say that compulsory acquisition of the land has to be in accordance with law and if there is any breach or contravention of such law, the aggrieved person can always approach the court. However, a controversy like this cannot be allowed to be raised by means of Public Interest Litigation on unspecific facts. 5. Writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed in limine. This will not preclude the affected persons to approach this Court in case acquisition of their land is in contravention of law. R.M. Lodha, CJ Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J. Anil/