IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
RAJIV ROY
Sunil Kumar Singh, Son of Late Ram Naresh Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAJIV ROY, J.
1. Heard Mr. Manu Tripurari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Gautam Kumar Yadav, learned AC to GP-26.
(A) PRAYER:
2. The present petition has been preferred for the following relief/s:
(i) for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari or order or direction to quash the order dated 29.10.2025 passed by the Additional Chief Secretary, Land Revenue Department vide Memo No. 1733, by way of which the Respondent No. 2 has rejected the representation of the petitioner for release of Petitioner's land from land acquisition proceedings;
(ii) for a declaration that the Land Acquisition Proceedings being L.A. Case No. 20/72-73 initiated under the "Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with respect to petitioner's land admeasuring 0.75 Acre comprised in Khata No. 26, Kheara No. 307 has lapsed in view of section 24(2) of Right To Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, Resettlement Act, 2013 and upon failure of the Respondents to take physical possession;
(iii) for a direction to the respondents to pay compensation to the Petitioner under Section 48(2) of The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the aforesaid land acquisition proceeding;
(iv) and/









The main legal point established in the judgment is that under Section 24(2) of the Fair Compensation Act, the acquisition proceedings would lapse if the possession of the land was not taken and comp....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that for the acquisition proceedings to lapse under Section 24(2) of Act of 2013, both the contingencies of non-possession and non-payment of compe....
Once possession is taken by the State after acquisition, the land vests in the State free from all encumbrances. The deposit of compensation in the Government Treasury prior to the enforcement of the....
The petition under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 must meet the gap period of five years, and the physical possession and compensation tender must be valid. The essentiality of the land for public ....
Compliance with the Land Acquisition Act, including the deposit of compensation and evidence of physical possession, is crucial for the validity of acquisition proceedings.
No reasonable explanation being given by the petitioners for such inordinate delay, this court should not go into the stale demand of the petitioners after lapse of years.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.