IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.879 of 2008 NARESH SINGH & ORS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the Appellants : Mr. Pushkar Narain Shahi, Advocate Mr. Manish Kumar No. 2, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Lalit Kishore, AAG III Mr. Satyabir Bharti, J.C. to AAG III --------- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal ------------ Dated, the 14th November, 2008. We heard the counsel for the appellants. 2. Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 provides for dispute as to apportionment being referred to the Civil Court for its decision and resolution. It reads thus: “ Dispute as to apportionment.---- When the amount of compensation has been settled under section 11, if any dispute arises as to the apportionment of the same or any part thereof or as to the persons to whom the same or any part thereof is payable, the Collector may refer such dispute to the decision of the Court.” 3. Counsel for the appellant did not dispute that there was dispute regarding the apportionment of compensation between different claimants. If that be so, the Collector could not have refused to refer the dispute at his ipse dixit. Such dispute needed to be referred. 4. In this view of the matter, the consideration of the 2 matter by the Single Judge is in accord and conformity with section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. 5. L.P.A. does not deserve to be admitted. It is dismissed in limine. R.M. Lodha, CJ Kishore K. Mandal, J. Anil/