IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13111 of 2007 1. KOSMI DEVI, WIFE OF LATE SAUKHI RAJBANSHI 2. PAPU RAJBANSHI, SON OF LATE SAUKHI RAJBANSHI 3. LALAN RAJBANSHI, SON OF LATE SAUKHI RAJBANSHI 4. CHHOTE RAJBANSHI, SON OF LATE SAUKHI RAJBANSHI 5. NEELMA DEVI, DAUGHTER OF LATE SAUKHI RAJBANSHI ALL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SITHAURA, P.S. RAJGIR, DISTRICT NALANDA. ---- PETITIONERS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, NALANDA AT BIHAR SHARIF 2. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, RAJGIR, NALANDA 3. THE DISTRICT LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, NALANDA 4. THE CIRCLE OFFICER, RAJGIR BLOCK, RAJGIR, NALANDA 5. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, DEFENCE DEPARTMENT, NEW DELHI 6. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ORDINANCE FACTORY, RAJGIR, NALANDA ---- RESPONDENTS ----------- 4 8.7.201 0 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Union of India and the State. The categorical statement of both the respondents is that the petitioner’s land has not been acquired and is not subject matter of Section 4, 6 or 11(1) notifications/publication. The lands which the petitioner claims belongs to him are as follows: Mauza Thana No. Khata Khesra Araji Sithauda 448 201 1560 10 D. 1582 18 D. 1588 6 D. 219 1569 23 D. 1577 22 D. 2 1587 10 D. 235 1562 11 D. 1586 25 D. 1590 5 D. 216 1568 10 D. 1589 5 D. In view of the aforesaid statements made on behalf of the respondents, the petitioner has nothing to fear, his lands are intact and he is entitled to retain the possession of the lands in question. This application is thus disposed of in view of the statements given in the counter affidavit of both the Union of India and the State Government. Sanjay ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)