(1.) In this batch of writ petitions, Bihar State Housing Board through its Managing Director, being the Petitioner, has challenged the validity and correctness of the separate orders passed by the appellate authority under the provisions of Section 60 of The Bihar State Housing Board Act, 1982 (in short "Act"), whereby in most of the cases, barring a few, the orders passed by the competent authority in terms of Section 59 of the Act have been affirmed and in the remaining cases, orders passed by the competent authority have been reversed. However, in all these cases, the appellate authority has rejected the claim of the Petitioner- Bihar State Housing Board (hereinafter in short "the Board") for eviction of the raiyats, who are private Respondents in this batch of the writ petitions, from the lands in question. The prayers of the Petitioner Board for recovery of rent and damages from the private Respondents have also been rejected by the Respondent Appellate Authority.
(2.) Material facts in all the cases are almost similar and identical. However, the case numbers and dates of orders passed by Competent Authority and Appellate Authority are different. Area of lands claimed by the raiyats/private Respondents is also different in each case. For the purposes of disposal of these writ petitions, I shall draw the basic facts occurring in C.W.J.C. No. 10920 of 1992, except by specific reference to any other particular case.
(3.) The case of the Petitioner Board, in short, is that a notification under Section 4 of The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (In short L.A. Act) was issued by the Collector for acquiring certain plots of land, total area being 227.78 acres, situate at Mohalla-Bahadurpur in the town of Patna. It is further claimed that subsequently a notification dated 01.05.1975 (Annexure-1) under Section 6 of the L.A. Act was also issued and thereafter, the Petitioner Board claims that the lands in question came in its possession on 22.07.1977 on conclusion of the proceeding under L.A. Act and, therefore, the private Respondents had/ have no legal right to continue over the same, unless and until the plots of land in possession of respective private Respondents are allotted in their favour by a valid order passed by the Petitioner-Board and its functionaries.