Patna High Court
Sanjeev Kumar and OrsversusThe State Of Bihar and Ors
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISS FOR NON-PROSECUTION
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed for non‑prosecution due to the petitioners' failure to appear.
Summary
Four petitioners filed a writ petition in the Patna High Court seeking a certiorari to quash an order dated 19-01-2013 passed by the Additional Judge II cum Special Judge (Land Acquisition) in Saran, which awarded them Rs.9,900 per decimal with 121% interest. They also demanded enhanced compensation of Rs.60,000 per decimal, reimbursement for house-related costs, a railway job for a family member, and other benefits. No counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioners, although the State was represented. The State counsel referenced a counter‑affidavit indicating that both parties had consented to the land fitment and that a PCC road was constructed in 2016. The court noted the petitioners' silence and lack of objection to the road. Since there was no appearance by the petitioners, the court dismissed the writ petition for non‑prosecution.
Issues considered
- Whether the order dated 19-01-2013 awarding compensation can be quashed by a writ of certiorari
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to enhanced compensation, reimbursement of house costs, a railway job, and other benefits
Subjects
- writ jurisdiction
- certiorari
- land acquisition
- compensation
- non‑appearance
- dismissal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12605 of 2018
======================================================
1. Sanjeev Kumar Son of Late Umesh Prasad
2. Dhruv Narayan Prasad
3. Janardan Prasad Both Sons of Late Ram Prasad Mahto
4. Sanjay Kumar Son of Late Raj Kishore Prasad All residents of Village
Chakanwada, P.O. , P.S. Aungari, District Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. The Principal Secretary, Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
3. The District Magistrate, Nalanda, Biharsharif.
4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Hilsa, Nalanda, Biharsharif.
5. The Executive Engineer, Rural Development Department, Hilsa, Nalanda,
Biharsharif.
6. The Circle Officer, Hilsa, Nalanda, Biharsharif.
7. The Director Construction Company.
8. Salendra Engi Com. Pvt. Kumuddinganj, Biharsharif at Nalanda.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : None.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, GP - 14
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
4 16-02-2026 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner though
the State is present.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
following relief/s:
(i) for issuance of an appropriate writ in the
nature of certiorari for quashing the order
dated 19-01-2013 passed in L.A.R. Case No.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12605 of 2018(4) dt.16-02-2026
2/3
38 of 2010 by learned Additional Judge IInd
cum special Judge (Land Acquisition) Saran,
Chapra as contained in Annexure-4 to
petition, whereby and where under learned
additional Judge IInd cum Special Judge
(Land Acquisition) Saran Chapra was
pleased to award Rs.9900/- per decimal with
121 interest and the relief of the petitioner
are as follows-:
(i) pay the enhanced compensation at
the rate of Rs.60000/- per decimal as
per government rate;
(ii) pay the genuine cost of the house
boring, tree, and well etc.;
(iii) give a job to the family member of
the petitioner in the Indian Railway;
(iv) provide other consequential benefits
to the petitioner;
(v) other awards for which the
petitioner is liable.
3. Learned State counsel Mr. Prasad has taken to the
counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no.5, the
Patna High Court CWJC No.12605 of 2018(4) dt.16-02-2026
3/3
Executive Engineer, Rural Development Department, Hilsa,
Nalanda, Biharsharif with reference to paragraph 06, according
to which both the sides gave 5 fit each land with their consent,
the PCC road was constructed by the State through the
Panchayat of that area in the year 2016.
4. The submission is that for long, the kaccha road
was being used on which the PCC road was constructed. The
petitioner maintains silence and did not raise any objection.
5. Be that as it may, since there is no appearance, the
writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/-
U
Checking your session…