Patna High Court – Orders
Shivkant Singh vs The State Of Bihar on 21 August, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
FIRST APPEAL No.172 of 2018
======================================================
Shivkant Singh S/o Late Balram Singh Resident of Village-Silao,Thana
No.420,Ward No.2 under Silao Nagar Panchayat Silao,PO Silao,P.S.
Silao,Dist.Nalanda
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Collector of the District,Nalanda at Bihar Sharif
2. The District Land Acquisition Officer cum Land Acquisition
Collector,Nalanda at Biharsharif
3. The Executive Engineer, Public Road Construction Department,Nalanda at
Bihar Sharif
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Aklavya Chandan Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Jai Nandan Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Anil Kr. Verma, AC to AAG-9
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI
ORAL ORDER
7 21-08-2025
This is an appeal under Section 74 of the Right to
Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter described
as “2013 Act”) filed by the appellant (per se interested)
challenging the amount of compensation calculated by the Land
Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority, Patna in
a Reference Case No. 01/2018 (N).
2. It is pertinent to refer, at the outset, that the
Presiding Officer-cum-Chairman, being the competent authority
under 2013 Act, by passing the impugned order, dated 25 th
September, 2018 made valuation of the land holding the nature
Patna High Court FA No.172 of 2018(7) dt.21-08-2025
2/10
of the land as “progressive residential” and accordingly
compensation was fixed.
3. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the
aforesaid order, dated 25th September, 2018, the appellant has
preferred the instant appeal.
4. It is pertinent to state that the L.A.R.R. Authority,
Patna by his impugned judgment held that the appellant was
entitled to get compensation amount @ Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees
One Lakh Fifty Thousand) per decimal along with other
statutory benefits. The respondent, State of Bihar and others
were directed to pay the said compensatory amount to the
appellant along with interest under Section 72 and 80 of the
2013 Act and additional compensation under Section 40(5) of
the said Act.
5. It is contended by the appellant that the acquired
land in question was wrongly treated as “progressive
residential” land instead of commercial land. It was contended
by the appellant that in Mauza Silao, there was absolutely no
land characterized as “progressive residential” land. The
competent authority did not consider the evidence adduced by
the witnesses on behalf of the appellant and the deeds in respect
of the acquired land by virtue of which the said lands were
Patna High Court FA No.172 of 2018(7) dt.21-08-2025
3/10
transferred as commercial land. Therefore, the competent
authority erred in relying on the Report of Six Men Committee
to fix the compensation of the acquired land in question.
6. Section 26 of 2013 Act deals with the manner and
procedure of determination of market value of land by the
Collector. The said provision runs thus: –
“26. (1) The Collector shall adopt the
following criteria in assessing and determining the
market value of the land, namely:–
(a) the market value, if any, specified in
the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (2 of 1899) for the
registration of sale deeds or agreements to sell, as
the case may be, in the area, where the land is
situated; or
(b) the average sale price for similar
type of land situated in the nearest village or nearest
vicinity area; or
(c) consented amount of compensation
as agreed upon under sub-section (2) of section 2 in
case of acquisition of lands for private companies or
for public private partnership projects, whichever is
higher:
Provided that the date for determination
of market value shall be the date on which the
notification has been issued under section 11.
Explanation 1.–The average sale price
referred to in clause (b) shall be determined taking
into account the sale deeds or the agreements to sell
registered for similar type of area in the near village
or near vicinity area during immediately preceding
three years of the year in which such acquisition of
Patna High Court FA No.172 of 2018(7) dt.21-08-2025
4/10land is proposed to be made.
Explanation 2.–For determining the
average sale price referred to in Explanation 1, one-
half of the total number of sale deeds or the
agreements to sell in which the highest sale price
has been mentioned shall be taken into account.
Explanation 3.–While determining the
market value under this section and the average sale
price referred to in Explanation 1 or Explanation 2,
any price paid as compensation for land acquired
under the provisions of this Act on an earlier
occasion in the district shall not be taken into
consideration.
Explanation 4.–While determining the
market value under this section and the average sale
price referred to in Explanation 1 or Explanation 2,
any price paid, which in the opinion of the Collector
is not indicative of actual prevailing market value
may be discounted for the purposes of calculating
market value.
(2) The market value calculated as per
sub-section (1) shall be multiplied by a factor to be
specified in the First Schedule.
(3) Where the market value under sub-
section (1) or sub-section (2) cannot be determined
for the reason that–
(a) the land is situated in such area
where the transactions in land are restricted by or
under any other law for the time being in force in
that area; or
(b) the registered sale deeds or
agreements to sell as mentioned in clause (a) of sub-
section (1) for similar land are not available for the
immediately preceding three years; or
(c) the market value has not been
Patna High Court FA No.172 of 2018(7) dt.21-08-2025
5/10
specified under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (2 of
1899) by the appropriate authority, the State
Government concerned shall specify the floor price
or minimum price per unit area of the said land
based on the price calculated in the manner
specified in sub-section (1) in respect of similar
types of land situated in the immediate adjoining
areas: Provided that in a case where the Requiring
Body offers its shares to the owners of the lands
(whose lands have been acquired) as a part
compensation, for acquisition of land, such shares in
no case shall exceed twenty-five per cent, of the
value so calculated under sub-section (1) or sub-
section (2) or sub-section (3) as the case may be:
Provided further that the Requiring Body shall in no
case compel any owner of the land (whose land has
been acquired) to take its shares, the value of which
is deductible in the value of the land calculated
under sub-section (1): Provided also that the
Collector shall, before initiation of any land
acquisition proceedings in any area, take all
necessary steps to revise and update the market
value of the land on the basis of the prevalent
market rate in that area: Provided also that the
appropriate Government shall ensure that the
market value determined for acquisition of any land
or property of an educational institution established
and administered by a religious or linguistic
minority shall be such as would not restrict or
abrogate the right to establish and administer
educational institutions of their choice.”
7. Thus it was incumbent upon the Collector and
subsequently the competent authority also to determine the
market value of the notified land on the basis of registered sale-
Patna High Court FA No.172 of 2018(7) dt.21-08-2025
6/10
deeds or agreements to sell, as the case may be, in the area
where the land is situated, or the average sale price for similar
type of land situated in the nearest village or nearest vicinity
area or consented amount of compensation as agreed upon under
sub-Section (2) of Section 2 in case of acquisition of lands for
private companies or for public private partnership projects.
8. Clause (c) of sub-Section (1) of Section 26 of 2013
Act is not applicable in the instant case, as the land in question
was acquired for construction of a road. Explanation 1 of
Section 26 further states that the average sale price referred to
Clause B of Section 26 (1) shall be determined taking into
account, the sale-deeds or the agreements to sell, registered for
similar type of area in the near village or near vicinity area
during immediate preceding three years of the year in which
such acquisition of land is proposed to be made. The appellant
produced sale-deeds of 2013 to show the market price of the
land in vicinity because the notification was dated 6 th December,
2013. The witnesses on behalf of the appellant, who deposed
before the competent authority, are the residents of the
neighbourhood of the acquired land. The competent authority
held in Paragraph 12 of the impugned judgment as hereunder: –
12. “All the eight witnesses examined
on behalf of the applicant have proved the case of
Patna High Court FA No.172 of 2018(7) dt.21-08-2025
7/10the applicant. These witnesses have fully cross-
examined by the learned A.G.P., AW-1 has stated in
evidence that there is no agricultural land in Silao
Nagar Panchayat and all the lands are commercial
and residential in nature. Small industries like rice
mill, trader’s shops are situated near acquired land.
AW-2 has also supported these facts and deposed
that he also runs two shops in land pertaining to
Khata No. 262, Khesra No. 2758 and proved the
contents of rent agreement. AW-3 has also proved
that Lease Agreement No. 2577/2010 was executed
by the appellant in his favour for running a petrol
pump but the license could not be issued. AW-4 has
also stated in his evidence that his house is adjacent
to Plot No. 229 & 184, which is mainly used for
residential and commercial purposes. AW-6
corroborated the case of the appellant stating on
oath that the plot in question is commercial and
residential in nature.”
9. This Court fails to understand that as to why the
competent authority dismissed the case of the appellant on the
basis of the Report of Six Men Committee.
10. It is on record that in order to fix the market value
of the acquired land, the competent authority had set up a Six
Men Committee. The said Six Men Committee submitted its
Patna High Court FA No.172 of 2018(7) dt.21-08-2025
8/10
report considering existing geographical situation of the land,
existing use of the land, already available advantages, live
proximity to national highway or road and/or developed area
and market value of other lands situated in the same
locality/village/area or adjacent or very near to the acquired
land.
11. This Court has already referred to the provision
contended in Section 26 of 2013 Act. The Clauses (a),(b),(c) of
sub-Section (1) of Section 26 do not state the criteria adopted by
Six Men Committee in fixing the market value, taking into
consideration, the existing geographical situation of the land,
existing use of the land and already available advantages etc.
12. The learned Advocate on behalf of the appellant
has also drawn my attention to Exhibit-5 Series to show that in
Mauza Silao, there is no land in the nature of “progressive
residential”. The entire mauza has two kinds of land, viz.,
commercial and residential in nature. Therefore, the competent
authority erred in relying on the Report of Six Men Committee
in fixing the minimum market value of per decimal land in
question.
13. The learned Advocate on behalf of the
respondents, on the other hand, submits that the Six Men
Patna High Court FA No.172 of 2018(7) dt.21-08-2025
9/10
Committee compromised of the Officers of Revenue
Department including the Registrar and Sub-Registrar. They
obviously considered the sale deeds and other documents of the
locality in arriving at the M.V.R. Therefore, this Court ought not
to have raised any doubt with regard to fixation of M.V.R. by the
Six Men Committee which was accepted by the competent
authority.
14. Having heard the learned Advocates for the
parties, this Court fails to comprehend that when the competent
authority failed in unequivocal term in Paragraph 11 of the
impugned judgment that the appellant was able to prove his
case, what was the reason for fixation of M.V.R. on the basis of
the Report of Six Men Committee. It is found from the
impugned order that the sale deeds and lease agreement filed on
behalf of the appellant were not at all considered by the
competent authority, though under Section 26 of 2013 Act, it is
incumbent upon the competent authority to consider the
contemporaneous sale deeds of the locality or near area or the
vicinity of the acquired land.
15. This Court finds that the calculation of
compensation amount on the basis of M.V.R. of “progressive
residential” land by the competent authority was not proper,
Patna High Court FA No.172 of 2018(7) dt.21-08-2025
10/10
legal and valid. The competent authority has failed to take
recourse of Section 26 of 2013 Act.
16. For the reasons stated above, the impugned award
is set aside and the Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 01 of
2018 is remanded back to the competent authority.
17. The competent authority is directed to pass a fresh
judgment, taking into consideration the deeds and documents
filed by the appellant, oral evidence of the witnesses adduced on
behalf of the appellant as well as the existing rate of the area in
vicinity on the basis of the contemporaneous sale deeds, within
eight weeks from the date of communication of the order.
18. In order to arrive to such decision, the authority
concerned is at liberty to call for some sale-deeds, beside the
sale-deeds filed by the appellant from the Registration Office,
executed during the relevant time of notification.
19. The instant appeal is, accordingly, allowed on
contest.
20. There shall, however, no order as to cost.
(Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)
Jyoti Kumari/-
U
[ad_1]
Source link