Patna High Court
Upendra Kumar SinghversusThe State Of Bihar and Ors
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The petition was dismissed as infructuous due to its voluntary withdrawal by the petitioner.
Summary
Petitioner Upendra Kumar Singh filed a writ petition seeking mandamus directing the State of Bihar and its officials to complete acquisition formalities for excess land taken beyond the notification under Section 4 read with Section 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act for the Kudra Railway Over Bridge, and to ensure payment of the land at current market rates under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, or alternatively to return possession. The petitioner claimed the authorities had taken possession without due process and caused damages. During the hearing, counsel for the petitioner informed the court that the grievance had been resolved and the petitioner wished to withdraw the petition. The court, noting the withdrawal, disposed of the writ petition as infructuous, without addressing the substantive merits.
Issues considered
- Whether the acquisition of excess land beyond the notification is illegal and warrants mandamus for completion of formalities.
- Whether compensation at current market rates under the 2013 Act is payable for the land in question.
- Whether the authorities must return possession of the land to the petitioner.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- land acquisition
- mandamus
- compensation
- Right to Fair Compensation Act
- railway over bridge
- withdrawal of petition
- possession
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10610 of 2014
======================================================
Upendra Kumar Singh S/o Late Ram Nagina Singh Resident of Village
Jahanabad, P.S. Kudra, District Kaimur Bhabhua.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. The District Collector, Kaimur Bhabhua.
3. The Competent-cum-District Land Acquisition Officer, Kaimur Bhabhua.
4. The Circle Officer, Kudra.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Chandra, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Md. Raisul Haque, SC-10
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 02-02-2026 Heard Mr. Krishna Chandra, learned counsel for the
petitioner as also learned State counsel.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
grant of following relief(s):
“(i) for issuance of an appropriate
Writ/Writs, direction/directions in the nature of
Mandamus or Writs, order or orders in the
nature of Mandamus directing the concerned
respondents to complete the formalities of
acquisition pertaining to the excessive land of
two (2) decimal acquired beyond the notification
issued under section 4 read with section 17(4) of
Patna High Court CWJC No.10610 of 2014(3) dt.02-02-2026
2/3
the Land Acquisition Act for construction of
Kudra Railway Over Bridge, which is apparent
from the measurement done by the committee
constituted by the District Administration as
contained in Memo No. 713 dated 10.10.2013
and further been pleased to direct the authorities
to ensure payment of entire land in question as
per the present market rate applicable as on date
which is provided in the new act named "The
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency
in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013",
In alternative the respondents may be
directed vacant to return back the possession of
the land in question to the petitioner which the
authorities have taken possession without
following the due process of law including by
quantifying the damages caused to the petitioner
during the period under which the land in
question remained under the unlawful possession
of the district authorities.
(ii) for any other relief/reliefs which
Patna High Court CWJC No.10610 of 2014(3) dt.02-02-2026
3/3
the Hon'ble Court may grant in general interest
checking these kinds of harassment to the
petitioners by the Government Officials that may
be deemed appropriate and necessary in this
case for protecting the interest and rights of the
petitioners by ensuring the benefits flowing from
the Act.”
3. It has been informed by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that the grievance stands redressed and as such, he
may be permitted to withdraw the petition.
4. Accordingly, the writ petition as also Interlocutory
Application if any, stand disposed of as become infructuous.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U
Checking your session…