The authority must consider land classification objections in compensation determinations, irrespective of timing, ensuring compliance with statutory obligations.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER

4 19-11-2025 The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs :

“(i). For issuance of writ of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to make compensation of the lands of the petitioners for the nature of residential instead of agricultural under the Right of Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act , 2013.

(ii). Further for issuance of direction upon the respondents to first decide the objection raised by the petitioners on 14.11.2019 and 13.10.2020 respectively with regard to fresh consideration of nature of land acquired by the Government of Bihar for Construction of side bandh of Babura-Doriganj Bridge for which notices of compensation dated 25.10.2019 considering the nature of the land being agricultural has been issued to all petitioners and only then start the construction work over the land of these petitioners.

(iii). Further for grant of any other relief/

reliefs for which petitioners are found entitled in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

2. Mr. Sushil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Atul Shankar, learned AC to SC-19 for the State-respondents and Mr. Vikash Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2, are present and they are heard.

3. The main grievance raised by the petitioners in this writ petition is that in respect of the petitioners’ lands, which have been acquired by the Government of Bihar for construction of side bandh of Babura Doriganj Bridge, the compensation amount was not decided in the light of the nature of the lands as the same were shown as agricultural lands while the petitioners’ lands were residential at that time and further, the objections filed by the petitioners after receipt of the copies of the awards, were kept pending by the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Bhojpur at Ara and the District Land Acquisition Officer, Bhojpur at Ara, since 14.11.2019 & 13.10.2020, respectively, while as per the provisions of section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (in short ‘Right to Fair Compensation Act’), the Collector is bound to refer an objection received by him with regard to the determination of compensation amount and the said provision has not been complied with by the Collector/the District Land Acquisition Officer, Bhojpur at Ara, for which the petitioners have suffered a lot as they have not been able to get compensation since 2019, for which the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Bhojpur at Ara, is solely liable as he is sitting tight on the petitioners’

objections.

4. On the other hand, Mr. Atul Shankar, learned AC to SC-19 for the State-respondents has vehemently opposed this application and submits that though reference under section 64 of Right to Fair Compensation Act was not made by the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Bhojpur at Ara, with regard to the determination of compensation in respect of the petitioners’ lands but in actual the objections, of which copies have been filed by the petitioners as ‘Annexure-4 series’, do not show the petitioners’ intention to object with regard to the quantum of the award and further, those objections were sent after the expiry of the prescribed time period which was mentioned in the award notices. It is further submitted by learned AC to SC-19 that for determination of the nature of the petitioners’ lands, a six- member committee gave its report after examining the lands, which were to be acquired, and after hearing the objections of the concerned parties and in this regard, a copy of their report has been filed with