Patna High Court
Umesh SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The petition is disposed by directing the District Magistrate‑cum‑Collector to consider the case under Section 64 of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 and refer it to LARRA, Gaya, following the precedent set in Kumar Ohm.
Summary
The petitioner, Umesh Singh, filed a writ petition seeking a direction that the District Magistrate‑cum‑Collector of Aurangabad refer his land‑acquisition matter 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 the court to consider the earlier decision in Kumar Ohm v. State of Bihar (CWJC No. 2743 of 2023) which had directed a similar referral. The State counsel raised no objection to relying on that precedent. The court examined the earlier order, noted that it directed the District Magistrate to consider the case under Section 64 and refer it to LARRA, and accordingly disposed of the present petition in the same manner, directing the District Magistrate to act accordingly.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition should be directed to be referred to LARRA, Gaya under Section 64(1) of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013.
- Whether the earlier order in Kumar Ohm v. State of Bihar is applicable to the present case.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- land acquisition
- LARRA
- Section 64
- RFCTLARR Act
- writ petition
- disposal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16810 of 2023
======================================================
Umesh Singh Son of Late Ramdev Yadav, Resident of Village Dundhua Tola,
Neyamatpur, P.S.- NTPC Khaira (Nabinagar), District- Aurangabad (Bihar).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue
and Land Reform, Govt of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Director, Directorate of Land Acquisition, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3. The District Magistrate -cum-Collector, Aurangabad.
4. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Aurangabad.
5. The Chief Executive Officer, Bhartiya Rail Bijlee Company Ltd. (A Joint
Venture of India Railway and NTPC) its office located at the campus of
BRBCL Khaira, P.S.- NTPC, Khaira Circle Nabinagar, District- Aurangabad.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anirudh Kumar Verma, Advocate
: Mr. Vyas Kumar Mishra, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sajid Salim Khan, SC-25
For the BRBCL : Mr. Amaresh Kumar Sinha, Advocate
: Mr. Vaibhav Narayan, Advocate
: Ms. Deeksha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 15-04-2026 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 LARRA, Gaya be
directed to dispose the same within stipulated period
as per Section 60(4) of the RTFCLARR Act, 2013.”
Patna High Court CWJC No.16810 of 2023(2) dt.15-04-2026
2/2
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)
vinayak/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.