Bishapit Kissan Sangharsh Morcha vs The State of Bihar and Others

Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. At the outset learned counsel for the State takes a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the writ application on the ground that the petitioner-Association is admittedly an unregistered Association of farmers whereas the relief claimed in the writ application is in the nature of individual relief for which the aggrieved persons ought to have approached this Court. In support of the stand learned counsel for the State has relied upon a large number of decisions of this Court and other courts, namely K.C. Thomas Vs. R.L. Gadeock and Another, Lawyers'' Association, Patna High Court, Ranchi Vs. State of Bihar, Sand Carrier''s Owner''s Union and others Vs. Board of Trustees for the Port of Calcutta and others, Umesh Chand Vinod Kumar and Others Vs. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti and Another, and Parents Teachers Association and Others Vs. Chairman, Kendriya Vidhyalaya Snagthan and Others,

Learned counsel for the petitioner in reply has sought to rely upon a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Steel Authority of India Ltd. Vs. S.U.T.N.I Sangam and Others, . He has also relied upon the cases of Vidyut Board Anukampa Niyukti Sangharsh Samiti and Others Vs. The Bihar State Electricity Board and Others, ; State of H.P. and Others Vs. Himachal Pradesh Nizi Vyavsayik Prishikshan Kendra Sangh, Minor Sunil Oraon Tr. Guardian and Others Vs. C.B.S.E. and Others, and State of Rajasthan Vs. Sevanivatra Karamchari Hitkari Samiti, .

So for as the decisions relied upon by learned counsel for the State are concerned, most of them pertain to the direct issue as to whether an unregistered Association may be permitted to file writ application and by and large the same has been negatived in the decisions cited by him.

So for as the decisions relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner is concerned, the said issue has not been directly raised though in several of the cases unregistered Associations had filed the writ application which were under consideration.

In my view, as a normal rule an unregistered Association not having any legal personality to sue or be sued in a Court should not be permitted to file a writ application but in exceptional cases particularly in matters involving public interest in PIL such Association may be heard in the interest of the general public.

In the present matter the relief sought is to enhance the award and pay the award amount of the land acquired by the respondents in the light of the present market value/as fixed by the Government of the land which was situated under Mauza-Pali, Chesi and Mamrejpur under Naubatpur Block in Patna district which was acquired by the Government of Bihar for construction of State Highway No. 78, Bihta-Sarmera Path.

The grievance as raised by the petitioner is clearly in the nature of individual grievance of the concerned farmer. In such circumstances, the writ application on behalf of an unregistered and unrecognized Association like the petitioner ought not to be maintained.

Apart from the above, this Court has serious doubt as to maintainability of such a writ petition even by an individual when the statutory remedy for enhancing the amount of the award is available under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act itself by seeking a reference to the Court. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the writ application is dismissed as not maintainable.