Patna High Court
Mithilesh Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The petition is disposed by directing the District Magistrate to consider the case under Section 64 of the RFCTLARR Act and refer it to LARRA, Gaya, following the precedent set in Kumar Ohm.
Summary
Mithilesh Kumar Singh filed a writ petition 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 dispose of it within the period prescribed by Section 60(4). The petitioner urged the Court to follow the reasoning in the coordinate‑bench decision in Kumar Ohm v. State of Bihar (CWJC No. 2743 of 2023). The State counsel raised no objection to applying that precedent. The Court observed that the earlier order directed the District Magistrate to consider the case under Section 64 and refer it to LARRA, and therefore disposed of the present petition on the same terms. The order thus directs the same procedural steps and declares the writ petition disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether the District Magistrate‑Collector should be directed to refer the petition to LARRA, Gaya under Section 64(1) of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013.
- Whether the present writ petition can be disposed in accordance with the coordinate‑bench order in Kumar Ohm v. State of Bihar.
Subjects
- writ jurisdiction
- land acquisition
- RFCTLARR Act
- Section 64
- Section 60
- LARRA
- precedent
- petition disposal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7229 of 2024
======================================================
Mithilesh Kumar Singh son of Shiv Prasad Singh, Resident of Village-E.O.-
165, Near Patel Chowk, Jantanagar (Hesla), P.S.-Patratu, Ramgadh, District-
Ramgarh (Jharkhand).
... ... 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. Vyas Kumar Mishra, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ajay Behari Sinha, G.A.-8
For resp. no. 5 : Mr. Amaresh Kumar Sinha, Adv.
Mr. Vaibhav Narayan, Adv.
Ms. Deeksha, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 20-04-2026 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
Patna High Court CWJC No.7229 of 2024(2) dt.20-04-2026
2/2
to dispose the same within stipulated period 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)
Vijay Singh/-
U
Checking your session…