Bindhyachal Singh v. The Additional Collector cum Arbitrator, Aurangabad
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
on the merit of the case, the writ petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
- RFCTLARR Act, 2013 s. 24(2)
Key paragraphs
- Para 77. Granting the said liberty and without commenting on the merit of the case, the writ petition is disposed of. Ravi/- U (Rajiv Roy, J)
Judgment
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s For the Respondent/s For NHAI ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY Mr.Anirudh Kumar Verma, Advocate Mr.Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, GP-14 Mr. Sanat Kumar Mishra, Advocate : : : ORAL ORDER 4 16-09-2025 Heard Mr. Anirudh Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner, the State as also learned counsel for the NHAI.
The present petition has been preferred for the following relief/s: (i) for quashing the awarded dated
12.3.2016 passed under "Right to Fair compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 which is amended award dated Patna High Court CWJC No.13160 of 2017(4) dt.16-09-2025
15.06.2012 under section 3G of the National Highway Act, 1956 under Gazette notification dated 8.12.2010 without following mandatory requirements under section 24(2) of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 and further for directing to the concerned authority for making payment compensation for the land acquired appertaining to khata no. 41 and Plot no. 28 of the same village which notification has not been issued after following mandatory requirements.
A counter affidavit has come on behalf of respondent nos. 2 to 4 in which it has been recorded that the petitioner has received Rs. 1,18,172/- as revised compensation beside Rs. 54,172/- that was earlier paid. This relates to Khata No. 41, Khesra No. 27, area 98 sq. meter.
So far as Khesra No. 28 is concerned, learned counsel for the NHAI has taken this Court to the gazette notification to show that the same is government land.
In that background, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be permitted to agitate the matter Patna High Court CWJC No.13160 of 2017(4) dt.16-09-2025 before an appropriate authority/competent Civil Court to determine their ownership on the land in question (khesra no. 28).
So far as the grievance regarding Khesra No.27 which the petitioner claims still exist, they are free to approach the appropriate authority for the redressal of the said grievance.
Operative part
Granting the said liberty and without commenting on the merit of the case, the writ petition is disposed of. Ravi/- U (Rajiv Roy, J)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: on the merit of the case, the writ petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
RFCTLARR Act, 2013 — s. 24(2).
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.