1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AC to SC-19 and the learned CGC appearing on behalf of the Union of India.

2. The writ application has been filed for a direction upon the Presiding Officer, Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Acquisition Resettlement Authority, Purnia to allow payment of Rs.82,48,208/- of the total compensation allowed by the court of Patna High Court CWJC No.9324 of 2024(3) dt.23-06-2025 2/3 Presiding Officer, Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Acquisition Resettlement Authority, Purnia vide order dated 20.09.2022 and Award dated 22.09.2022 issued in reference to the aforementioned order which has been sent by the District Magistrate, Kishanganj, Bihar with the statutory interest so applicable in the facts and circumstances.

3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that a counter affidavit on behalf of respondent no.4 and 5 have been filed, wherein at Para-10, it has been specifically pleaded that against the order dated 20.09.2022 passed by the Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Acquisition Resettlement Authority, Purnea in Land Acquisition Reference Case No.74/2015-1610, as per Section 74(1) of RFCTLARR Act, 2013, respondent no.4 i.e. the District Magistrate, Kishanganj has filed an appeal bearing M.A. No.455/2025 (Government of Bihar vs Jitendra Kumar Pandey @ Jitendra Kumar). The learned State counsel thus submits that since M.A. No.455/2025 has been preferred by the District Magistrate, Kishanganj against the order dated 20.09.2022 passed by the Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Acquisition Resettlement Authority, Purnea in Land Acquisition Reference Case No.74/2015-1610, in that event, for the present, the relief sought Patna High Court CWJC No.9324 of 2024(3) dt.23-06-2025 3/3 in the instant writ application cannot be granted for the reason that if M.A. No.455/2025 is allowed, the order dated 20.09.2022 passed by the Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Acquisition Resettlement Authority, Purnea in Land Acquisition Reference Case No.74/2015-1610 shall be set aside.

4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner was not aware of the pendency of M.A. No.455/2025 and by way of counter affidavit only the petitioner has come to know that M.A. No.455/2025 has been filed on behalf of the District Magistrate, Kishanganj. It is submitted that the petitioner has also been informed about the same.

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, for the present the Court is not inclined to entertain the writ application, as such the writ application is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh writ application in the event M.A. No.455/2025 is dismissed, seeking the relief as sought in the instant writ application.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/-