Patna High Court
Dilip Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The petition is disposed by directing the District Magistrate to refer the matter to LARRA, Gaya under Section 64(1) of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013, in line with the Kumar Ohm precedent.
Summary
Dilip Kumar Singh filed a writ petition in the Patna High Court seeking a direction that the District Magistrate‑Collector of Aurangabad refer his case to the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority (LARRA), Gaya under Section 64(1) of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 and that the authority dispose of it within the period prescribed in Section 60(4). The petitioner urged that the petition be decided in accordance with a prior coordinate‑bench order in Kumar Ohm vs. State of Bihar (CWJC No. 2743 of 2023). The State counsel raised no objection to relying on that precedent. Justice Rajiv Roy examined the earlier order, which directed the District Magistrate to consider the case under Section 64 and refer it to LARRA. Applying the same reasoning, the Court directed the District Magistrate to refer the matter to LARRA, Gaya and disposed of the writ petition.
Issues considered
- Whether the District Magistrate‑Collector, Aurangabad, should be directed to refer the petitioner's case to LARRA, Gaya under Section 64(1) of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013.
- Whether the petition can be disposed of by following the precedent set in Kumar Ohm vs. State of Bihar.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Land acquisition
- RFCTLARR Act
- LARRA
- Writ petition
- District Magistrate
- Precedent
- Disposition
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10044 of 2024
======================================================
Dilip Kumar Singh Son of Ram Pukar Singh, resident of Village- Kurwan,
P.S.- Narari Kala Khurd, District- Aurangabad, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue
and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Director, Directorate of Land Acquisition, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Aurangabad.
4. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Aurangabad.
5. The Chief Executive Officer, Nabinagar, Power Generating Company
Limited, its office located at Main Gate Sasna, P.S.- Nanari Kala Khurd
Circle- Nabinagar, District- Aurangabad.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anirudh Kumar Verma, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Addl. Advocate General (7)
For respondent no.05 : Mr. Amaresh Kr. Sinha, Advocate
Mr. Vaibhav Narayan, Advocate
Ms. Deeksha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 27-04-2026 Heard Mr. Anirudh Kumar Verma, learned counsel for
the petitioner and the State.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
following relief(s):
“for direction to the authority concerned
particularly to Respondent No. 3 to refer the matter
before LARRA, Gaya under Section 64(1) of the
RTFCLARR Act, 2013 on the application being filed
by the petitioner on merit and the LARA, Gaya be
directed to dispose the same within stipulated period
Patna High Court CWJC No.10044 of 2024(3) dt.27-04-2026
2/2
as per Section 60(4) of the RTFCLARR Act, 2013.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset,
submits that his case be also considered and disposed of in the
light of the order passed by the Coordinate Bench in Kumar Ohm
vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. (CWJC No. 2743 of 2023) dated
12.07.2023.
4. Learned State counsel has no objection to it.
5. The relevant portion of the aforesaid order passed in
Kumar Ohm (supra) read as follows:
“Considering the circumstances, the
District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Aurangabad is
directed to consider the case of petitioner under
Section 64 of the RFCTLARRA, 2013 and shall pass
order on merit and shall refer the matter for
reference before LARRA, Gaya.
With this observation and direction, the
present Writ Petition stands disposed off.”
6. In that background, the aforesaid writ petition is also
disposed of in the same term.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/-
U
Checking your session…