IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4808 of 2003 Krishna Murari Singh, son of Late Dwarika Singh, village Dasharatha, PS Phulwari Sharif, Dist. Patna. Vs. (1) The State of Bihar, (2) The District Magistrate cum Collector, Patna. (3) The District Land Acquisition Officer, Patna. (4) The Additional District Land Acquisition Officer, Patna. (5) Bharat Petroleum Corporation, Pakri, Patna - Respondents. 20 27-8-2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that he has not received the remaining amount of compensation awarded in Land Acquisition Case No. 6/1996-97, although notice under section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act was issued to him after fixing and determining the remaining amount to be paid. The facts are that two objections were filed, one by Kalawati Devi and the other by Bharat Petroleum Corporation. Kalawati Devi is claiming title over the said land whereas objection of Bharat Petroleum Corporation is that the petitioner has sold the land under acquisition to them and is now claiming compensation for the same land. The counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State indicates that the matter has been sent vide memo no. 846, dated 31.12.2003 to the Special Land Acquisition Judge, Patna under section 30 of the Act for determining the title of the dispute lands. It appears that the matter is still pending before the Civil Judge. From the statements made in the counter affidavit it is not quite clear as to whether both the objections have been 2 referred to the Civil Judge under section 30 of the Act or whether it was only the application filed on behalf of Kalawati Devi that has been referred for determination to the Civil Judge. In case the Collector finds that only one matter has been referred under section 30 of the Act to the Civil Judge, then it would be incumbent upon him to refer the other matter or at least to dispose of the objection. The claim of Bharat Petroleum Corporation that the lands acquired for the Corporation has been sold to them, is a question which can be determined by verification of the sale deed, the land acquisition record, khatiyan and the spot verification. It would be quicker if the Collector was to decide this issue, as it would involve the determination of facts from documents and the spot verification after giving notice to the parties. The State counsel, on the other hand, submits that the Collector has no power to make an enquiry after the stage of 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act. This aspect of the matter, is subject to the fact, that the matter has not already been referred under section 30 of the Act, and steps have not been taken under section 12(2) of the Act. In any event the Special Land Acquisition Judge should try to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible. The petitioner and the State are directed to cooperate before the Special Land Acquisition Judge. I may mention here that the petitioner has also filed T.S. No. 167/2000 in which Bharat Petroleum Corporation is defendant. The suit has been filed for declaration of right, title and 3 interest with respect to Schedule ‘I’ land mentioned in the plaint, and for restraining the defendant from erecting pillars, wall etc. on the suit land. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the lands which are the subject matter of dispute are beyond the lands which have been acquired. The parties are at liberty to bring this order to the notice of the Collector, Patna and the Special Land Acquisition Judge, Patna. This writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. haque ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)