IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC NO.16076 OF 2007 1. MADAN SINGH 2. KEDARNATH SINGH & 3. DEO NARAYAN SINGH, RESIDENT OF BELSAR, PO BELSAR, ARWAL, MEHANDIA, DIST ARWAL. VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. COLLECTOR, ARWAL 3. SDM, ARWAN 4. ANCHAL ADHIKARI, KALER, ARWAL 5. UNION OF INDIA 6. IRCON INTERNATIONAL LTD., PALIKA BHAWAN, DELHI & 7. AGM, IRCON, SONE BHAWAN,IST LFOOR, DAROGA PD.RAI PATH, PATNA. ----------- 7 05.03.2010. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioners have come to this Court for a direction to respondents to restrain them from making any road through their raiyati lands bearing Survey plot nos. 1008 & 1069, situated in village Belsar, P.S. Mehandia, Anchal Kaler, District Arwal. Petitioners are raiyats of Survey plot no. 1008 appertaining to Khata no. 44 measuring 88 decimals and plot no. 1069 appertaining to Khata no. 93 measuring 52 decimals of village Belsar, P.S. Mehandia, Anchal Kaler, Arwal. They state that Union of India with due concurrence of the State Government got constructed a road under the Prime Minister’s Gram Sarak Yojana (in short the PMGSY) which passed through the aforesaid plots. The respondents without acquiring the land under the law made construction on it. According to petitioners, as soon as process of construction started, they had filed representations to different authorities, and even approached them personally as well. One such representation addressed to the CO on 29.1.2008 has been annexed as annexure 2 to this application. The representation dated - 2 - 2.5.2008 addressed to the Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya is contained in annexure 5. The petitioners also approached Janta Durbar of the Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya on 7.3.2008. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the CO, Kaler in his report to the S.D.O., Arwal stated that a road is being constructed on a portion of Raiyati land of petitioners bearing plot nos. 1069 & 1008 of village Belsar. He has further stated in the report that tension is prevailing amongst raiyats which may cause breach of peace anytime. Copy of report of the CO has been appended as annexure 6. A counter affidavit dated 19.2.2009 has been filed by the Circle officer, Kaler on behalf of the Collector, Arwal, in para 9 whereof it has been stated as follows:- It is true that the road is being constructed by IRCON International Limited, a Government of India undertaking. It is also true that Khata no. 44 plot no.1008 and Khata no. 91, Khesra No. 1069 is rayati lands. Some parts of both the rayati lands have been used for construction of the road by IRCON company. The counsel for the State submits that the construction was being done by the Union of India through its agency under Central Government plan, as such, the responsibility of making payment of any compensation would fall upon them. Counter affidavit dated 11.2.2010 has been field on behalf of respondent –IRCON Ltd. In para 4 thereof it has been stated that upgradation and consolidation of the rural road under PMGSY is covered under core net work and has got concurrence of Government of Bihar and on the basis of said core net work a Detailed Project Report - 3 - (DPR) was prepared which got the approval of National Rural Road Development Agency (NRRDA) Government of India under PMGSY scheme. However, in para 5 they state that the said earthen rural road was well in existence, prior to the execution of upgradation and consolidation work under PMGSY scheme and on the same alignment the work has been done. In para 6 it has been stated that they have not constructed new road on raiyati land of petitioner, rather the same has been upgraded and consolidated. From the pleadings of the parties, it appears that plots in issue are raiyati lands of petitioners and a road passing through it has been constructed under the PMGSY scheme. It further appears that no acquisition proceeding was initiated under the Land Acquisition Act for utilizing the raiyati land of the petitioners by the Government. Various representations of petitioners, as also report of the Circle officer, Kaler show that petitioners made protest against the alleged construction at the initial stage itself, but none paid any heed to it. In a civilized society, every person has right to unfettered enjoyment of his property and he cannot be deprived of the same, save and except as provided by law. The writ petition was filed in year 2007 when the process of construction had just began. Now road has already been constructed. Furthermore no care was taken by respondents to ascertain whether road encroached any private raiyati land and whether any acquisition proceeding was initiated to acquire the same. In such a situation, the court is left with only two alternatives. Firstly either to direct the respondents to undo the - 4 - construction which passed through raiyati land of petitioners or to direct them to pay compensation. At this stage, as the road has already been completed, petitioners opt for second option, which seems reasonable. In the backdrop of aforesaid circumstances, I direct respondents particularly, respondent numbers 1 to 4 to make measurement of petitioners’s land which has come under construction and pay compensation accordingly. It is worthwhile to note that though the scheme was of Union Government executed through its agency, nevertheless same had concurrence and approval of State Government. They would be at liberty to recover the same from respondent no. 5 to 7. Process of payment of compensation must be completed within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Writ petition stands allowed in above terms. Shashi. (Samarendra Pratap Singh,J.)