IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.4963 of 2010 1. SRI NATHUN SINGH, SON OF LATE RAM BARAN SINGH, VILLAGE CHULAHAI CHAK, P.S. DANAPUR, DISTRICT PATNA. AT PRESENT MOHALLA + P.S. RUPASPUR, P.O. SAHAY NAGAR, DISTRICT PATNA. 2. SRI KAPILDEO THAKUR, SON OF LATE RAM KISHUN THAKUR, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHULAHAI CHAK, P.S. DANAPUR, DISTRICT PATNA. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ PETITIONERS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH DR. C. ASHOKVARDHAN, THE SECRETARY & COMMISSIONER, LAND REFORMS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. SUDHIR KUMAR, THE SECRETARY, BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. INDRASEN SINGH, THE DIRECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4. JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, PATNA. 5. A.W. ANSARI, DISTRICT LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, PATNA. 6. ARSHAD ALAM, THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, DANAPUR DIVISION, BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 7. KAPIL DEO CHAUDHARY, THE JUNIOR ENGINEER, DANAPUR DIVISION, BUILDING CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- OPPOSITE PARTIES ******** 4 20.4.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State. By order dated 16.7.2009 this Court had directed that the land and the house standing on the land, should be remeasured in view of the fact that a stand was taken on behalf of the petitioners that the valuation had been reduced by the Collector. Remeasurement was done on the direction of this Court. The remeasurement is annexed in the show-cause as Annexure-B. The measurement is not under 2 challenge. The petitioners submit that the valuation has wrongly been fixed in view of the fact that it should be in accordance with the valuation fixed by the State Government. This aspect of the matter can be raised in an application filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. Counsel for the petitioners submits that a case is already pending before the Special Judge, Land Acquisition, Patna. All these issues can be raised and decided if not already done. The second part of this Court’s order indicates that the grant of solatium according to the new policy floated by the State Government in 2007 should be considered by the authorities. This provides payment of 60% solatium, if the land is voluntarily given up by the land holder. The prayer has been rejected by the District Magistrate, Patna, as the petitioner had filed the application for voluntarily surrender after much delay i.e. on 30.2.2011 i.e. after passing of the order of this Court. Considering these aspect, I do not find any ground is made out for issuance of 3 contempt against the respondents. The petitioners would be at liberty to challenge the order contained in Annexure-G to the show cause. This contempt application is disposed of. Sanjay ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)