SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Pat) 703

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
BIBEK CHAUDHURI, J.
Manif Mian, Son of Noor Mohammad Mian - Petitioner 
Versus 
The State of Bihar, through the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Revenue and land Reform, Government of Bihar, Patna and Ors. – Respondents
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16235 of 2021
Decided On : 27-08-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajeev Ranjan
For the Respondents: Mr. Md. Khurshid Alam.

Proper compensation assessment procedures under Section 64 of the 2013 Act must be followed, allowing the authority to consider referral and potential delays for justifiable reasons.

Headnote:(A) Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Sections 11(1), 21(2), and 64 - Writ petition challenging the award for land acquisition - Claim for compensation based on land classification - The petitioner contends that acquired land should be treated as residential rather than agricultural, seeking a reassessment of compensation. (Paras 1-4)

(B) Authority's Role - The court highlights that the appropriate remedy for the petitioner lies in referring the matter to the Collector under Section 64 for proper assessment and compensation. (Paras 4-6)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenges the award issued for land acquisition related to the Indo-Nepal Border Road, claiming the land should be valued as residential property contrary to how it was classified.

Findings of Court:
The Court directs the petitioner to refer the matter to the Collector to assess compensation as per the provisions of the 2013 Act.

Issues: The main issues addressed include the classification of the acquired land as agricultural versus residential and the adequacy of the compensation awarded.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasizes that proper compensation assessment procedures under Section 64 must be followed and that the authority may consider delays if justifiable at the time of reference.

Result: Writ petition disposed of, directing appropriate reference to authority for compensation assessment.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's request for fair compensation. (Para 1 , 2)
2. procedure for objection to land acquisition awards. (Para 3)
3. referral to authority for assessment and compensation. (Para 4)
4. disposal of writ petition directing reference. (Para 5)
5. court's directive on delay condonation and dismissal. (Para 6 , 7)

JUDGMENT :

BIBEK CHAUDHURI, J.

The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition for the following relief(s) :

I.) To issue a writ/Writs, Order/Orders, Direction/Directions to the respondent authorities to set aside the award (Annexure-2) prepared by the respondent no. 6, because the same is contrary to the Right to fair compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013( Act no. 30/2013)

II.) To issue a writ/Writs, Order/Orders, Direction/Directions to the respondent authorities to prepare fresh award as per the Right to fair compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013(Act no. 30/2013)

III.) To issue a writ/Writs, Order/Orders, Direction/Directions to the respondent authorities to consider the market value of the land as well as price fixed by the government for the land of locality.

IV.) To issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the Respondent Authorities to pay 18% interest on the award from the date of acquisition till the actual payment.

V.) To issue other direction/ directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case.

2. The case of the petitioner in brief is that a notice under Section 11(1) of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 (“2013 Act”, for brevity) was issued on 19th September, 2019 for acquisition of land under 2013 Act for construction of Indo-Nepal Border Road. Since the petitioner had no objection if the disputed property was acquired by the State, the respondent authorities issued a notice under Section 21(2) of 2013 Act in LA Case No. 104/2015-16 on 17th October, 2016 in which 22 decimal of land owned by the petitioner in khata no. 144, khesra No. 107 (1) of Mauza Inarwa were acquired. It is also contended by the petitioner that the land which has been acquired is situated at the vicinity of the dwelling house of the petitioner though the nature of land was recorded as Baanswari (Bamboo Grove). The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents wrongly treated the land as agricultural land but it ought to be treated as a residential land and the amount of compensation should be enhanced.

3. It is provided in Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 :-

"64. Reference to Authority.

(1) Any person interested who has not accepted the award may, by written application to the Collector, require that the matter be referred by the Collector for the determination of the Authority, as the case may be, whether his objection be to the measurement of the land, the amount of the compensation, the person to whom it is payable, the rights of Rehabilitation and Resettlement under Chapters V and VI or the apportionment of the compensation among the persons interested:

Provided that the Collector shall. within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of application, make a reference to the appropriate Authority:

Provided further that where the Collector fails to make such reference within the period so specified, the applicant may apply to the Authority, as the case may be, requesting it to direct the Collector to make the reference to it within a period of thirty days.

(2) The application shall state the grounds on which objection to the award is taken:

Provided that application shall be made-every such

(a) if the person making it was present or represented before the Collector at the time when he made his award, within six weeks from the date of the Collectors award; (b) in other cases,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top