Patna High Court
Hetu KishunversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court held that the award must be amended to include the statutory benefits and the counsel’s name must be corrected, and accordingly modified the earlier judgment.
Summary
The petitioner, Hetu Kishun, appealed the judgment dated 14‑10‑2025 in F.A. Nos. 322, 323 and 325 of 1994, contending that the award omitted statutory benefits under the Land Acquisition Act. The petitioner also pointed out that the name of his counsel was incorrectly recorded in the judgment. The Court examined the submissions and found merit in both contentions. It directed the concerned office to incorporate the benefits prescribed under Sections 23(1‑A), 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act while preparing the award. Additionally, the Court ordered that the name of the petitioner’s counsel be corrected to Mrs. Sheela Sharma in the judgment. The order thereby modified paragraph 1 and paragraph 5 of the earlier judgment.
Issues considered
- Whether the award should include statutory benefits under Sections 23(1‑A), 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act.
- Whether the name of the petitioner’s counsel should be corrected in the judgment.
Legislation cited
- Land Acquisition Act — s. 23(1-A), 23(2), 28
Subjects
- Land Acquisition
- Statutory Benefits
- Judgment Modification
- Correction of Record
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3900 of 2025
In
FIRST APPEAL No.322 of 1994
======================================================
Hetu Kishun S/o Late Gudar Sao, Resident of Village- Moshimpur Kurtha,
P.S.- Fatwah, District- Patna at present residing at Village- Govindpur,
Maharani Chowk, P.S.- Fatwah, District-Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Sheela Sharma, Advocate
Mr.Shivendra Kumar Roy, Advocate
Ms. Smriti Kumari Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Government Pleader 19, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 09-01-2026 Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
the judgment dated 14.10.2025 passed in F.A. Nos. 322 of 1994,
323 of 1994 and 325 of 1994, statutory benefit is not there in the
said judgment. As such, it has been prayed that the direction
may be issued to the office that while preparing award the
statutory benefits enshrined under Sections 23(1-A) and 23(2)
and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act also be added.
2. Office is directed to do the needful.
3. Let the Judgment dated 14.10.2025 be modified to
that extent i.e., para no. 1.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also
submitted that her name/appearance does not find place in the
Patna High Court MJC No.3900 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
2/2
said judgment dated 14.10.2025.
5. Let the name of learned counsel for the appellants
in the judgment dated 14.10.2025 be read as Mrs. Sheela
Sharma in place of Mr. Ram Nandan Prasad Sinha.
6. Judgment dated 14.10.2025 is modified to the
above extent i.e., para no- 5.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Shubham/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.