Satyavrat Verma, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned SC- 25 for the State.

2. The Collector, Banka in compliance of the order dated 14.11.2024 is present in the Court.

3. The Collector, Banka, at the outset, submits that the land in dispute belongs to the petitioner but then he is not entitled for compensation for the reason that the land in dispute for a pretty long time even prior to 1986 was being used by the villagers as rural road.

4. The said submission of the Collector has been recorded at the outset as it would have bearing on adjudication of the instant writ application.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that land pertaining to Khata No. 36, Khesra No. 1955, area 80 decimal (in dispute 20 decimal), Thana No. 386, Mauza Bagdumba was purchased by the mother of the petitioner Late Shobha Ghose from Arvind Kumar Rai by a registered sale deed dated 20.02.1986.

6. It is further submitted that the respondent authorities constructed Bhagalpur-Dumka Road to Bagdumba under Chief Minister Rural Land Anurakshan Programme in which 20 decimal of the land in question was used without acquiring the same under Section 4(i) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and without consent of the land owner, as such, no compensation was paid to the land owner. It is next submitted that the mother of the petitioner after purchasing the land got the same mutated and Jamabandi No. 1675 was created. The Circle Officer, Baunsi also issued Land Possession Certificate (Annexure-2) in the name of the mother of the petitioner, thereafter the rent of the land has been paid up-to-date up till 2022-23 (Annexure-3). Learned counsel next submits that subsequently even the Circle Officer issued Land Possession Certificate on 20.06.2024 when the dispute had arisen (Annexure-P-10 of the supplementary affidavit on behalf of the petitioner). It is also submitted that the Circle Officer even accepted rent up-till 2025.

7. It is further submitted that the mother of the petitioner died on 26.04.2021 but prior to her death she had objected the construction of the road without acquiring the land. It is next submitted that from perusal of Annexure-4, it would manifest that the road was constructed under Chief Minister Rural Land Anurakshan Programme.

8. It is further submitted that since no action was taken on the objection of the mother of the petitioner, hence, the petitioner made a representation dated 07.06.2022 (Annexure-5) before the District Magistrate, Banka raising his grievance and the copy of the representation was also sent to other respondents.

9. It is submitted that since representation of the petitioner was not acted upon, as such, the instant writ application has been filed seeking a direction upon the authorities to pay compensation of 20 decimal of land utilized for construction of the aforesaid road without acquiring the land.

10. It is further submitted that a counter affidavit on behalf of the Collector (respondent no. 2) and District Land Acquisition Officer (respondent no. 3) was filed on 10.02.2023 wherein it was pleaded that the road in question was constructed by the Rural Works Department, Bhagalpur represented by the respondent no. 6 and 8 in the year 2012. Further, the road was constructed under PMGSY bearing Package No. BR-03-043 pursuant to the scheme 2008-09, in pursuance whereof an agreement was executed in between respondent no. 8 and the contractor. The road, accordingly, was constructed in the year 2012 and the maintenance of the road was fixed from 01.10.2012 to 30.09.2017. The writ petition has been filed in the year 2022 i.e. 10 years after the construction of the road when NIT was invited for maintenance of the road from 23.09.2021 to 22.09.2026, thus it is contended that had the road been built on the land of the petitioner in that event the writ petition would not have been filed after such a delay.

11. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the Collector and the respondent no.