IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.2032 of 2006 KAMAL DEO NARAYAN SINGH, SON OF LATE RAMLAL SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE+P.O.-PARBATTA, DISTRICT-KHAGRIA. ………………PETITIONER. Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. MR. MAYANK BARBORE, SON OF NAME NOT KNOWN D.M., KHAGARIA. 3. MR. ABDUL MAHHAN, SON OF NAME NOT KNOWN S.D.O.CUM D.C.L.R., GOGRI. 4. KAMESHWAR SHUKLA, LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, KHAGARIA. 5. AKHILESHWAR PRASAD SINGH, C.O., PARBATTA, KHAGRIA. …………OPPOSITE PARTIES. WITH CWJC No. 14185 of 2004 KAMALDEO NARAIN SINGH, SON OF LATE RAMLAL SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE+P.O.+P.S.-PARBATTA, DISTRICT- KHAGARIA. …………………PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE LANDS REFORMS. 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KHAGARIA. 4. THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, KHAGARIA. 5. THE L.R.D.C., GOGRI, KHAGARIA. 6. THE CIRCLE OFFICER, PARBATTA, KHAGRIA. ………………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 7 12.11.2008 These two cases have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. M.J.C. application was filed alleging contempt of an interim order passed in the abovementioned writ application on 25.4.2006. By the interim order two months time was granted to the respondent-State to make payment of entire amount of compensation along with solatium and interest at the statutory rate till the date of payment to 2 the petitioner. In the contempt matter time was granted to the opposite parties to file show cause and show cause has been filed. In the show cause the relevant notification of the authorities of the State have been annexed to show that total area of 13.59 acres of land was acquired by the authorities which included 6.93 acres of land of the petitioner. As a follow-up action of the requisition, compensation was determined and award was prepared which included the amount of compensation, soletium and statutory interest till the date of issue of notification. The award was published on 26.3.2008. It was also stated that the notification under Section 4 for acquisition of the said 13.59 acres of land was published on 16.10.2006. Therefore, the valuation of the land was determined at the market rate as on 16.10.2006 and soletium and interest was accordingly calculated. The share of the amount of award has already been paid to him. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that besides the area of 6.93 acres 3 of land with regard to which, after the orders of this Court, notification was published and award was prepared and the amount has been paid to him, another area of 2.48 acres of land of the petitioner was also under the proceeding of acquisition. That proceeding was started in 1982 itself numbered as land acquisition no. 11 of 1982- 83. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said proceeding was started in respect of the land of the petitioner and others which was taken by the respondent for rehabilitation of financially able displaced persons. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said proceeding has continued since then but since no final order was passed for acquisition of the said land, no award could be prepared and the petitioner has not been able to get the compensation for the same. Therefore, as per the interim order of this Court, the respondents were also liable to pay the compensation for the said land of the petitioner covered under the proceeding under case no. 11 of 1982-83. Learned Additional A.G. No. 3 4 submits that since the proceeding for acquisition of that land was still pending, there was no question of payment of compensation to them as no final orders for acquisition of the same has been passed formally. Additional A.G. No. 3 is correct. However, the factual position remains that some financially displaced able persons have settled on the land of the petitioner which was accepted by the State authorities and the proceeding was started for acquisition of the land. Therefore, it can not be denied that the petitioner was displaced from said land and the authorities of the State accepted the position and took up a policy decision to acquire the land acknowledging the rehabilitation of the financially able displaced persons on the same and pay the compensation for the same to the petitioner. Annexure-1 of the writ application shows that the proceeding was started in 1982-83 but it is an admitted position that the same has not been finally concluded, and therefore, the petitioner is neither here nor 5 there. The result is that neither he is in possession of the land nor he has got compensation for the same, for which the authorities of the State have started the proceeding but have not been able to conclude the same till now. Therefore, while dismissing the contempt application, it would be appropriate to dispose of the writ application with a direction to the State authorities to conclude the said proceeding no. 11 of 1982- 83 positively within a period of one year from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order with follow-up action of preparation of award and payment of compensation to the petitioner. In case, the State authorities are not able to conclude the said proceeding, the said proceeding shall stand quashed on completion of the said period. In that event, if the petitioner submits an application to the District authorities particularly the District Magistrate and S.P. of the District to give all assistance to him to resume possession of the land, they shall be obliged to give 6 assistance to the petitioner for the purpose. This direction has been issued in the light of the fact that the petitioner’s claim to the land or compensation has remained hanging in balance due to pendency of the land acquisition proceeding no. 11 of 1982-83 and he has been deprived of taking any steps for resuming possession of the land illegally occupied by the so-called financially able displaced persons. So far as award of compensation and payment to the petitioner with regard to 6.93 acres of land is concerned, the petitioner will be at liberty to dispute the fixation of the value of the land and quantum of soletium, interest etc. in accordance with law before an appropriate forum. In the result, the above contempt application is dismissed and the writ application is disposed of with the above observations and directions. Arvind/ ( J. N. Singh, J.)