IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.1176 of 2009 1. ABUL HAYAT 2. ABUL HSNAT, SONS OF LATE MD. IRFAN 3. ABUL BARKAT, 4. ABUL KALAM, SONS OF LATE MD. SULEMAN 5. MAHMOOD ALAM, 6. MOBIN ALAM, SONS OF LATE MD. SULTAN 7. NAIYAR ALAM, 8. NADIR ALAM, 9. NAUSHAD ALAM, 10. NASIR ALAM, 11. NAWED ALAM, SONS OF LATE MD EHSAN. ALL RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE AND POST OFFICE DIGHALBANK, P.S. DIGHALBANK, DISTRICT-KISHANGANJ. (PETITIONERS) – APPELLANTS Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH THE SECRETARY, RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, NEW DELHI. 2. THE C.M.D, N.B.C.C. LTD., BHISHM PITAMAH MARG, NEW DELHI-110 003. 3. THE GENERAL MANAGER (BIHAR), N.B.C.C. LTD., B-6 VIJAYNAGAR, RASH BIHARI PATH, RUKUNPURA, PATNA-800 014. 4. THE PROJECT MANAGER, N.B.C.C., LTD., VIKASH BHAWAN, BEHIND S.P. OFFICES, KISHANGANJ. 5. THE STATE OF BIHAR, 6. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KISHANGANJ. 7. THE SUBDIVISIONAL OFFICER, KISHANGANJ. 8. THE CIRCLE OFFICER, DIGHALBANK, DISTRICT KSIANGANJ. (RESPONDENTS) – RESPONDENTS ------- For the Appellants : Mr. Najmul Hoda For Union of India : Mr. Kalika Nand Jha For Respondents : Mr. Satish Kr. Sinha No.2 to 4 For the State : Mr. Lali Kihsore, AAG 3. 2 3 14.09.2009 Heard Mr. Najmul Hoda, for the appellants, Mr. Kalika Nand Jha, for respondents no.1 and 2, Mr. Satish Kumar Sinha, for respondents no. 2 to 4 and Mr. Lalit Kishore, learned Additional Advocate General -3, for respondents no.5 to 8. The present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed against the order dated 26th February, 2009, passed in CWJC no. 2630 of 2009 claiming that they should be paid compensation on account of the fact that their lands have been utilized for construction of road under Pradhan Mantri Graam Sarak Yojna. The learned single Judge has dismissed such petition observing that the writ petitioners should file suit before the Civil Court. Filing of the suit before Civil Court will take long time. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we feel that interest of justice will be served if the appellants are permitted to make representation before the District Magistrate, Kishanganj, respondent no.6. The District Magistrate will look into the matter and if, in fact, it is found that the land was utilized and the appellants are otherwise entitled to compensation, necessary steps should be taken for 3 its payment. The representation should be disposed of as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the representation. This order should not be construed as expressing any opinion in the matter. It goes without saying, that if the appellants feel aggrieved with the order of the District Magistrate it will be open for them to pursue their remedy in accordance with law at that stage. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. (P.K. Misra, CJ.) (Anjana Prakash, J.) AAhmad