IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1474 of 2003 1. MURARI LAL, Son of late Pali Ram, resident of mohalla- Kothiya Saidpur Kurji, P.S. Digha, Distt. Patna 2. Mahabir Sah, Son of late Bihari Sah, resident of mohalla-Shivji Nagar, P.S. Jakkanpur, Distt. Patna. ..............Petitioners. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Collector, Patna. 2. Secretary, Urban Development Department, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Secretary, Revenue Department, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Secretary, Road Construction Department, Patna. 5. The Chief Engineer, Road Construction Department, Patna. 6. The Patna Regional Development Authority through its Chairman. 7. The Patna Municipal Corporation through the Chief Executive Officer. 8. The Engineer-in-Chief, Public Health Engineering Department, Bihar, Patna. 9. The Executive Engineer, Biswas Board, Boring Road, Patna. 10. The District Magistrate, Patna. .........Respondents. ----------- 8 09.12.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.A.G-III appearing on behalf of respondent State and its functionaries, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Patna Municipal Corporation and learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.9. The petitioners have raised their grievances in the present writ petition that though a proceeding under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referring to as the Act) was initiated for acquiring their lands over plot no. 2174 appertaining to Khata No.994 situate at village Sandalpur, Agam Kuan in the town and district of Patna, but neither acquisition proceeding was completed 2 nor award was prepared, yet their houses standing over plot in question were demolished by the authorities concerned, without any notice issued to them, for the purpose of improvement of road conditions and drainage etc. However, despite such demolition, they have not been paid any compensation or damage for the same. The writ petition was filed as far back as on 5.2.2003 and more than seven years have passed since then. In compliance of the orders passed by this Court in the present proceeding counter affidavit /supplementary counter affidavits have been filed on behalf of the authorities, but they have not denied the allegation of demolition of certain part of the houses of the petitioners or taking forcible possession of certain remaining part of the lands. However, respondents have tried to shift their responsibilities from their own head to the head of some other authorities, without specifically naming them. The petitioner no.1 claims that his father had purchase one katha of land of aforesaid plot no. 2174 through registered deed of sale dated 26.4.1973 vide Annexure-1. The petitioner no.2 claims to have purchased ten dhurs of land of aforesaid plot No. 2174 by virtue of registered sale deed dated 20.4.1990 and he accordingly claims to have come in possession over the purchased portion of land. It is further case of the petitioners that land acquisition case no.16 of 1980-81 was started for acquiring certain plots of land including the lands in question for Ganga Bridge Constriction, and for that notification in terms of section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued some time in 1980. The valuation of land was assessed by the respondent District Collector- Patna to be Rs. 27589.10/-, yet the 3 requisitioning authority i.e. the Executive Engineer, Ganga Bridge Project, Division-1, Patna did not provide requisite amount of money for the purpose of acquisition of lands in question. Therefore, award in terms of section 11A of the Land Acquisition Act was not prepared. Consequently the whole land acquisition proceeding itself lapsed. Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on a document at annexure-4, whereby the District Land Acquisition Officer, Patna, recommended to the respondent Collector for taking action in terms of section 48 of the Act, as, according to him the proceeding started in the year 1980 and despite passage of about 15 years award has not been prepared under section 11 A of the Act. Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that though the lands in question was not acquired under the provisions of the Act, yet the respondent authorities have demolished their houses for the purpose of improvement of road and preparation of drainage etc. Before taking such action neither any notice was given to them nor any proceeding was started by them and, therefore, entire actions on the part of respondent State and its functionaries should be held to be arbitrary and illegal. According to him in view of demolition of their houses and taking forcible possession of their lands, they are entitled to have compensation for the same. Learned A.A.G-3 has submitted that admittedly the acquisition proceeding was not completed by the respondent authorities, as Award was not prepared under section 11 A of the Act, and , therefore, there was no occasion for taking possession of the lands in question in terms of section 16 of the Act. He further 4 submits that since lands were not acquired by the respondent State in the eye of law, therefore, there was no question of taking any steps for releasing the lands in question in terms of section 48 of the Act. However, he has fairly submitted that if the petitioners are at all aggrieved by the illegal action of certain authorities, then they can approach either the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction or to the District Collector, Patna for getting the matter adjudicated and for getting their grievances redressed. A counter affidavit has separately been filed on behalf of respondent no.-9 and Patna Municipal Corporation. Though, they have denied their hands in demolition of the houses of the petitioners, but they have not disputed as a matter of fact that the houses of the petitioners have not been demolished. They have also not denied that the lands belonging to the petitioners have not been used for the purpose of widening of the road and creation of drainage etc. After having heard the parties and on perusal of materials available on record, this court is of the considered opinion that grievances of the petitioners are required to be considered properly by some competent authority. If the houses belonging to the petitioners have been demolished illegally, then responsibility for payment of compensation/damages for such demolition is required to be fixed and petitioners would be entitled for compensation/damages for the same. If some vacant portion of the lands belonging to the petitioners is found to have been acquired for the purpose of widening of road and for preparation of drainage etc., in that case also the petitioners are entitled to have some compensation. Ours being a 5 welfare State, the respondent-authorities cannot be permitted to deny the legitimate rights of the petitioners by shifting responsibility from one head to other. The petitioners can not be left in the lurch. The valid grievances of the petitioners are required to be redressed. Asking the petitioners to approach the Civil Court for redressal of their grievances would be a cumbersome and time consuming proceeding. In the facts and circumstances stated above, this court is inclined to give liberty to the petitioners to file an appropriate application along with all relevant documents before respondent District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Patna within period of one month from today and if such a petition is filed, the respondent District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Patna would be obliged to examine the whole matter. The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Patna may either himself or through some higher competent authority get the entire matter enquired into about the factum of claims of the petitioners regarding demolition of their houses or regarding taking forceful possession of their vacant portion of lands. Enquiry must be held after giving proper and valid notice to the petitioners. Endeavour should be made to hold enquiry in their presence. After such enquiry and giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, if the District Magistrate-cum-Collector comes to a finding that houses belonging to the petitioners have been illegally demolished by some authority or/ and they have forcefully taken possession over the lands belonging to the petitioners, then in that case he will be obliged to pass an order for payment of compensation or damages to the petitioners. Entire exercise must be completed by the respondent District Magistrate- 6 cum-Collector, Patna within a period of five months from the date of filing of the application by the petitioners. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Rahman/ (Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)