IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC NO.12281 OF 2010 1. HRIBANSH NARAYAN SINGH S/O LATE PRIYABRAT NARAYAN SINGH R/O VILL.- NARPAT NAGAR, P.S.- SAKRI, DISTT.- MADHUBANI 2. RAJESH ROSHAN S/O LATE RAGHUBANSH NARAYAN SINGH R/O VILL.- NARPAT NAGAR, P.S.- SAKRI, DISTT.- MADHUBANI VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECRETARY 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, (NATIONAL HIGHWAY), GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE COLLECTOR, MADHUBANI 4. THE ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR, MADHUBANI 5. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MADHUBANI 6. THE DISTRICT LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, MADHUBANI 7. MADHUCON PROJECT LTD., N.H.57, BR-07, DARBHANGA SITE BASE CAMP MANIGACHHI, DISTT.- DARBHANGA, THROUGH ITS PROJECT MANAGER, DARBHANGA WITH CWJC NO.12317 OF 2010 1. ADITYA NARAIN SINGH S/O LATE JAI MANGAL PRASAD SINGH R/O VILL.- NARPAT NAGAR, P.S. SAKRI, DISTT.- MADHUBANI VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT (NATIONAL HIGHWAY), GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE COLLECTOR, MADHUBANI 4. THE ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR, MADHUBANI 5. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MADHUBANI 6. THE DISTRICT LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, MADHUBANI 7. MADHUCON PROJECT LTD., N.H.57, BR-07 DARBHANGA SITE, BASE CAMP MANIGACHHI, DISTT.- DARBHANGA, THROUGH ITS PROJECT MANAGER, DARBHANGA WITH CWJC NO. 12339 OF 2010 1. ABDUL MALIK @ MALIK S/O LATE ABDUL AJIM R/O VILL.- MOKRAMPUR TOLE SORIPATTI, P.S. SAKRI, DISTT.- MADHUBANI VERSUS 1. THE STATE THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECRETARY 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ROAD CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, (NATIONAL HIGHWAY), GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE COLLECTOR, MADHUBANI 4. THE ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR MADHUBANI 5. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MADHUBANI 6. THE DISTRICT LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, MADHUBANI 7. MADHUCON PROJECT LTD. N.H.57, BR-07 DARBHANGA SITE, BASE CAMP MANIGACHHI, DISTT.- DARBHANGA, THROUGH ITS PROJECT MANAGER, DARBHANGA ********* FOR THE PETITIONERS :- MR. AMRENDRA NARAYAN, ADVOCATE 2 FOR THE N.H.A.I. :- MR. N. K. AGRAWAL, SR. ADVOCATE MR. SUNIL KUMAR, ADVOCATE DR. BIDHU RANJAN, ADVOCATE MR. RANJAY KUMAR SINGH, ADVOCATE FOR THE S T A T E :- MR. RABINDRA PRIYADARSHI, AC TO AAG III MR. ANSHUMAN SINGH, ADVOCATE ********** 4 09/09/2010 In these three writ applications, the petitioners have made grievances with respect to the area of land acquired, the rate to which they are entitled for grant of compensation, the damage that would be payable to them in view of the fact that the possession of the land has been taken in the year 2006, whereas the lands were subsequently notified after taking the possession and the interest to which the petitioners would be entitled to in view of the late payment of the award amount. It has been stated on behalf of the petitioners in the writ applications that they have filed an application before the Arbitrator to decide these issues. It would, thus, be proper for the Arbitrator to take up the case of the petitioners expeditiously and decide the issues referred to aforesaid within a period of six months on receipt/production of a copy of this order. I would like to clarify that for the purpose of fixing the area which has been acquired, there is a discrepancy in the notification and the actual area which has been acquired. It would thus be incumbent upon the 3 Arbitrator to determine this aspect by ordering for spot verification by measuring the lands acquired so that the facts may be determined and there should be no further litigation with respect to this aspect of the matter. Naturally, the petitioners would need to be noticed regarding the date on which the spot verification and measurement is to be made. Counsel appearing on behalf of the National Highways submits that the petitioners have been issued notice so that they can receive compensation amount. For this purpose, the petitioners have to furnish some documents. I, thus, direct that the petitioners should appear along with a copy of this order and the documents required before the competent authority, who will make payment of the admitted amount. Needless to say the receipt of the compensation amount would not prejudice the case of the petitioners with respect to the rate of the compensation amount fixed for the lands or the interest to which they are entitled under the law. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J. )