IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.18879 of 2010 BAIDHNATH SINGH S/O LATE RAMNANDAN SINGH, R/O VILL- KARMUPUR, NAYA TOLA, AMESH, P.S. BIDDUPUR, POST- NAVANAGAR, DIST. VAISHALI --- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, VAISHALI AT HAJIPUR. 2. THE D.C.L.R. VAISHALI 3. THE DISTRICT LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BIDDUPUR, VAISHALI 4. THE CIRCLE OFFICER, BIDPUR, VAISHALI. -- RESPONDENTS. ----------- 03 06.01.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner questions the sustainability of order dated 19.05.2010, passed by respondent Collector Vaishali in Mutation case no. 78/2007-08 (Baidhnath Singh vs. Anchal Adhikari, Bidupur) whereby objection preferred by him under Section 5A of the of the Land Acquisition Act ( hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) has been considered and rejected. It is the stand of the petitioner that by a reason of the such proposed acquisition small pieces of land belonging to the petitioner appertaining to new Khata no. 188, 238, 177 05 and 262 shall be acquired and the same will rendered him landless. It is further the stand of the petitioner that he is an ex army man and the lands in question were purchased by him. The authority under the Act got the physical verification made by the respondent Circle Officer. Petitioner was afforded opportunity of hearing. On a consideration of the materials on record, respondent Collector has found that, the stand of the petitioner that by reason of acquisition of the land in question, the 2 petitioner shall be rendered landless, is erroneous. It has been found thereunder that besides the lands in question petitioner does hold/owner other agricultural lands. It has further been found that the plot on which residential house is located is not under acquisition. The Collector has found that the purpose for acquisition of land is construction of a road which will benefit large section of the society including those belonging to the deprived section. After having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner and the State, this Court is satisfied that no procedural and or jurisdictional error has been committed by the respondent Collector justifying this Court to invoke extra ordinary writ jurisdiction in the matter. Learned counsel for the petitioner referring to an order dated 06.10.2010 passed in C.W.J.C.No. 15766 of 2010 (Rameshwar Rai & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.) submits that this Court has directed for re-measurement of the land by the land acquisition Officer. In fairness to the counsel, this Court has taken into consideration the aforesaid order dated 06.10.2010. The writ petitioners of the aforesaid case had approached this Court before filing objection under Section 5A of the Act. The case of the petitioner, in my view, stands on altogether a different footing. The application is dismissed. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)