IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.18419 of 2008 1. ASHOK KUMAR 2. SHIV CHANDRA KUMAR 3. BIJENDRA KUMAR 4. SATYENDRA KUMAR ALL SONS OF LATE ADYA PRASAD @ ADYA RAI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KHAIDALPURA, P.O. & P.S. BIHTA, DISTRICT PATNA. ---- PETITIONERS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE COLLECTOR, PATNA. 3. THE DISTRICT LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, PATNA. 4. SMT. KUNDALA DEVI, WIFE OF SRI RAMESHWAR PRASAD 5. BIJAY YADAV 6. AJAY KUMAR 7. SANJAY KUMAR, SONS OF SRI RAMESHWAR PRASAD 8. RAM SINGHASAN 9. SUDARSHAN RAI 10.RAJ KUMAR RAI @ MIRCHAIYA RAI, SONS OF SRI CHANDRAMAN RAI 11.TALKESHWAR PRASAD @ GUPTA, SON OF LATE SRI KISHUN RAI, ALL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KHAIDALPUR, P.O. & P.S. BIHTA, DISTRICT PATNA. AT PRESENT ALL RESIDENT OF MOHALLA CHAKARAM, P.O.-G.P.O., P.S. BUDHA COLONY, PATNA. --- RESPONDENTS ----------- 6 23.7.2010 In a Land Acquisition Case No. 12/2007-08, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 15.10.2008 by which they have been asked to return 80% of the compensation amount on the ground that they are not the sole owner of the land which has been acquired in view of the objections filed on behalf of the private respondents who are their cousins. Ramprit Goap, Ramkrit Goap and Pragas Rai were three brothers. Ramprit Goap died issueless in 1950. Pragas Rai died in 1975 in jointness with Ramkrit Goap. The respondents are grand daughters of Ramkrit Goap whereas the petitioners are grand sons of Pragas Rai. The respondents being daughters were married and were living in their respective homes and as such the case of the respondents is that the petitioners taking advantage of this fact got their names mutated in the records of rights. 2 On hearing of the land acquisition proceeding, the respondents filed their objection and the District Land Acquisition Officer passed an order for return of 50% of the advance award amount paid by the petitioners. In the facts aforesaid, it would be proper that the matter should be referred forthwith after preparation of the final award under Section 30 to the Court to decide the apportionment of the award amount. In the special circumstances of this case as far as 20% amount is concerned, the Collector, Patna on receipt of the money should deposit the money in the court. The court in seisin of the matter may deposit 20% in the bank so that the amount may earn interest as the Title Suit/Section 30 matter is likely to take sometime. As far as the order of the Collector to refund 50% of the 80% amount paid to the petitioners is concerned, it has been made on the basis of the fact that the Collector has accepted the respondents’ plea that they are also entitled to the award amount. The Collector should call upon the petitioner to give an undertaking to refund the amount withdrawn with interest if the reference under section 30 is decided against the petitioner. This application is disposed of with the aforesaid directions. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)