CHANDO GOPAL YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mrs. Nivedita Nirvikar, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mrs. Shashi Priya, appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Sajid Salim Khan, learned SC-25, appearing for the State- respondents, and Mr. Manish Dhari Singh, learned counsel, appearing for Respondent No. 6.

(2.) The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs:--

(3.) Mrs. Nivedita Nirvikar, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, has argued that for the construction of National Highway No. 82 (GayaHisuaRajgirBihar Sharif Sec. ), the land of the petitioner, which falls in Village Salempur, Police Station Mufassil, in the District of Gaya, was said to be acquired vide notification of the Government of Bihar published in the newspaper on 10/6/2018. In the said notification, the petitioner's land finds place at Serial No. 10, the nature of which was shown as private land, and a copy of the notification has been filed before this Court as Annexure-1. Subsequently, on 26/4/2019, in the Hindi newspaper namely Hindustan, the Gazette of India was published, in which it was specifically mentioned that after the publication of the said Gazette notification, the land mentioned would vest in the Central Government. The petitioner's land finds place at Serial No. 103 in the said notification, but the nature of the land was shown as Gairmajarua (Government Land) in the notification, while in the earlier notification, the petitioner's land was marked as private land. The petitioner was unaware of the new development and was waiting for notice from the competent authority of NH-82 for the payment of compensation in lieu of the acquisition of his land. It has been further submitted that the grandfather of the petitioner, namely Late Banwari Mahto @ Banwari Yadav, got his title in the land in question through settlement pertaining to Khata No. 73, Plot No. 102, having an area of 3.44 acres, from the ex-landlord, namely Govind Lal Nakfofa, and the ex-landlord had filed Compensation Case No. 105/2016, 5354, in which the grandfather of the petitioner was mentioned as a settled raiyat. It has been further submitted that for the construction of an over- bridge at River Falgu, some portion of the land of Plot No. 102 was acquired in the year 1981, for which the petitioner's uncle, namely Muni Yadav, was given compensation (award) vide Land Acquisition Case No. 5 filed by the State Government on 22/8/1996. The land concerning Plot No. 102 of Khata No. 73 was recorded in the government records in the name of the petitioner's grandfather, but suddenly the mutation was cancelled on 14/5/2020 by the Circle Officer, Manpur, Gaya, against which the petitioner's aunt, namely Late Puniya Devi, preferred Mutation Appeal No. 30 of 201112/51 of 201011 before the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Gaya (in short, "DCLR, Gaya"). The appeal was decided in favour of the petitioner's aunt, and the DCLR, Gaya, in his order dtd. 15/6/2011, directed that the demand with respect to the land of Khata No. 73, Plot No. 102, having an area of 3.72 acres, would continue in the name of the petitioner's aunt. Thereafter, the son of the ex-landlord preferred a revision before the Additional Collector, Gaya, vide Revision Case No. 210 of 201112, against the order dtd. 15/6/2011 passed by the DCLR, Gaya, in Mutation Appeal No. 30 of 201112/51 of 201011, but that revision was dismissed by the Additional Collector, Gaya, vide order dtd. 24/7/2014 (Annexure-3). Learned counsel has further argued that when the officials of NH- 82 came to the petitioner's land for measuring it for the purpose of acquisition, the petitioner came to know that in the Gazette notification, his land had been wrongly mentioned as Gairmajarua land. He then met the respondent authorities to make the necessary correction so that he could get compensation, but his request fell on deaf ears, and finally, on 23/1/2021, the petitioner wrote to the District Magistrate, Gaya, by way of Annexure-4. It has been further submitted that the petitioner has sold some part of his land of Plot No. 102 to different persons who have got their mutation done in connection with their purchased land, but all of a sudden, in the month of February 2021, the measurement of their land was commenced, and the land of the purchasers too was marked to be acquired, while in the sanctioned map for acquisition of land, the purchasers' land was exempted. It has been lastly submitted that after filing this writ application, from Annexure-B to the counter- affidavit filed by the State-respondents, the petitioner came to know that a committee consisting of the Land Acquisition Officer, Gaya, Circle Officer, Manpur, DCLR, Sadar Gaya, and Deputy Collector, Gaya, had recommended cancellation of the Jamabandi of the petitioner's land. Therefore, by filing I.A. No. 01/2022, the petitioner has also prayed to set aside the said report dtd. 26/8/2021, which has been prepared and given completely in a biased manner after the filing of this writ application, and further, the petitioner was not given an opportunity of hearing by the said four-member committee.