IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16914 of 2007 GANA NAND MISHRA, SON OF LATE SHIV NANDAN MISHRA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NARUAR, P.S. BHAIRAV ASTHAN, DISTRICT MADHUBANI. ---- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF SURFACT TRANSPORT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI. 2. THE PAY AND ACCOUNTS OFFICER, MINISTRY OF SURFACE TRANSPORT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI. 3. THE REGIONAL MANAGER, MINISTRY OF SURFACE TRANSPORT, I.A.S. COLONY, PATNA. 4. THE PROJECT MANAGER, NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, N.H. 57, DARBHANGA. 5. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MADHUBANI. 6. THE DISTRICT LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, MADHUBANI ---- RESPONDENTS For the Petitioner :- Mr. Manoj Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Union of India :- Mr. Gopesh Kumar, Advocate For the N.H.A.I. :- Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate Mr. Ranjay Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Lalit Kishore, Sr. Adv., A.A.G.III Mr. Anshuman Singh, Advocate ----------- 6 8.7.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioner’s lands have been acquired by several land acquisition proceedings which have been stated at paragraph 4 of the writ application giving the description of the lands in question, the area acquired and the details regarding the lands. The award has been prepared in the proceedings, but has not been paid to the petitioner on the ground that a Ceiling 2 Proceeding is pending against the petitioner. This Court by order dated 17.3.2009 had ordered that the Collector, Madhubani should dispose of the Land Ceiling Case No. 9 of 1973-74 within a period of three months from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order. In the mean time, the petitioner had come to this Court in the year 2008 itself with a grievance that he was not getting an opportunity to file an objection under Section 10(3) of the Land Ceiling Act. As a result of which opportunity was granted to the petitioner to file an objection in the ceiling proceedings. Subsequently on 17.11.2008 the petitioner has filed his objections. Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to Form L.C. 5 prepared under Section 11 of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of ceiling area and Fixation of surplus land) Act. The draft statement includes the lands which are under acquisition, which appertain to Khata No. 464, 459, 462 and 470. The main contention of the petitioner is that he has already given an undertaking 3 that he will return the award amount with interest in the case of any adverse order by the ceiling authorities and as such there is no justification for the Land Acquisition Officer in not allowing him to withdraw the award amount. It is also submitted that the authorities have already excluded the lands which the Government wishes to declare as surplus under the Ceiling Act and, therefore, there is no impediment for the State to make payment. One should also keep in mind that the petitioner would always have the option under Section 9 to choose the lands which he wishes to retain in the ceiling proceeding and as such this Court does not find that there can be any possible justification for withholding the award amount which is to be paid to the petitioner. This writ application is thus allowed with a direction to the Land Acquisition Officer to pay the award amount to the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of three months. Sanjay ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)