IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3736 of 2008 1. Digendra Lal Ramdas S/o Late Soti Lal Ram Das, Resident of Dharam Sala Road, Kishanganj, P.S.-Kishanganj, District-Kishanganj. 2. Dilip Kumar Ramdas S/o Digendra Lal Ramdas at present residing flat No. 59/60 Boring Canal Road, Hartali Chowk, P.S.Kotwali, District-Patna. 3. Prabin Kumar Ramdas S/o Virendra Kumar Ramdas, Residnet of Dharam Sala Road Kishanganj, P.S.- Kishanganj, District- Kishanganj. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. The Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Commissioner, Purnia Divison, Patna. 4. The District Magistrate, Kishanganj. 5. Sri Radhey Shyam Singh, the then District Magistrate, Kishanganj. ----------- For the Petitoners:- Mr. Ajatshatru, Adv. For the State:- Mr. A. K. Upadhyay, Adv. Mr. Yashraj Bardhav, Adv. ------------ 2. 28.06.2011 Heard Mr. Ajatshatru, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay learned S.C. 20 for the State. The petitioner has filed I.A. No. 10192 of 2010 praying therein that the name of petitioner no. 1 be deleted in view of him having died. He further submits that as the heirs of the deceased petitioner no. 1 are already on record being petitioner no. 2, no substitution is required. In view of the submissions made on the basis of the I.A. application to which no rejoinder has been filed by the State, the prayer is allowed but the same will not act as preventing any other person who 2 may have interest in the property of the deceased petitioner no. 1 to get the same determined by raising a claim. Let the petitioner no. 1 be deleted from the cause title of the case and the original petitioners no. 2 and 3 be now arrayed as petitioners no. 1 and 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners on merit. His grievance is that though his raiyati land has been taken over for including it within the residential campus of the District Magistrate, Kishanganj but the same was done without following any procedure known to law and even without giving him a penny by way of compensation after any acquisition of his land. Various submissions have been made in support of this contention but this Court in view of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent State does not think it necessary to go into those aspects. Learned counsel for the respondent State fairly points out that in sum and substance, the stand of the respondents is that the private raiyati land has been included for the residential quarter of the District Magistrate, Kishanganj for which the land acquisiton proceedings had been initiated may not survive as of now and further that the 3 Commissioner, Purnia has also obtained certain amounts to be paid with regard to acquiring the land which has been included in the residential quarter of the District Magistrate, Kishanganj. From the position emerging out from the submissions made on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the State, this Court feels that at least this much is clear that the private raiyati land has been taken over for the residential premises of the District Magistrate, Kishanganj for which no proceedings have been taken to their logical conclusion resulting in non payment of compensation to the genuine land holders. This being the position, this Court is inclined to dispose off the writ petition with a direction to the District Magistrate, Kishanganj to get the land measured in presence of the petitioners and also any other claimant of the land which is private land and included in his residential premises within one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order upon him. If the same is done the process for acquisition of the land under the present existing scheme shall be initiated and if it is mutually agreed between the parties, to cut short the time, straightway the compensation amount may be paid to them. The 4 petitioner assures that all the procedures as contemplated under the land acquisition Act shall not be insisted to be strictly formed by him. This process should also be preferably completed within two months thereafter. With these observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed off. Anand Kr. ( Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)