Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 977 (PAT)

Krishna Nandan Pd. v. State Of Bihar

2013-08-12

BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA

body2013
ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 1 to 3 as also learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no.4. However, none is appearing on behalf of the respondent no. 5 and 6 to oppose the prayer made in the present writ petition, though both of them have already entered appearance through their lawyers. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by a communication dated 03.05.2007 (Annexure-1) issued by the Branch Manager of the respondent Bank of India, whereby operation of the Saving Bank Account No. 2099 standing in the name of the petitioner has been stopped in the light of the communication made by the respondent District Land Acquisition Officer, Patna. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a plot of land bearing Khesra No. 1248 appertaining to Khata No. 502, area 1 acre 30 decimals situate at village- Sarhan, P.S. Barh, District Patna has been acquired by the respondent State of Bihar and its functionaries under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short “the Act”). An award has been prepared in the name of the petitioner with respect to the aforesaid acquired area of land. A notice under Section 17A of the Act was issued in the name of the petitioner for receiving 80% of the Award amount, to the extent of Rs. 2,76,057.60 (Rupees Two lakh seventy six thousand fifty seven and sixty paise). The petitioner claims to have received the aforesaid amount, but subsequently, in view of objection raised by respondent no.5, a communication was made by District Land Acquisition Officer, Patna on 29.03.2007, where after by the impugned communication dated 03.05.2007 (Annexure-1),operation of saving Bank account standing in the name of the petitioner has been directed to be stayed. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned action of the respondents is wholly illegal and contrary to the provisions of the Act. 5. Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondent no. 1 to 3 as also respondent no. 4 have opposed the prayer made in the present writ petition, but have not been able to show that any reference was made by any aggrieved person either in terms of Section 18 or in terms of Section 30 of the Act. There is nothing on record to show that even appeal has been filed under Section 54 of the Act. There is nothing on record to show that even appeal has been filed under Section 54 of the Act. As noticed above, none is appearing on behalf of the respondent no.5 and 6 to contest the claim of the petitioner. 6. After having heard the parties and taking into consideration the materials available on record, the communication dated 03.05.2007 (Annexure-1) issued by the respondent Bank is hereby set aside. The petitioner shall be entitled to operate the aforesaid Bank account. However, if some one including respondent no. 5 is aggrieved by the award prepared under the provisions of the Act, then he/she shall be at liberty to approach the appropriate forum/court under the provisions of Sections 18, 30 or 54 of the Act. If such a claim is raised or any such appeal is filed by any aggrieved person, then the same shall be heard and decided strictly in accordance with law. 7. The writ petition stands allowed to the extent indicated above.