Patna High Court
Pankaj PrasunversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The court held that the petitioner may file a fresh objection under the Pipelines Act and disposed the writ application without quashing the acquisition notice.
Summary
Petitioner Pankaj Prasun challenged a notice dated 18‑01‑2024 declaring acquisition of his land for a crude‑oil pipeline under the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962, alleging that the mandatory preliminary notice under Section 3(1) was never served. He filed a writ seeking quash of the Section 6(1) notice, contending that without the Section 3(1) notice he was denied the statutory right to object. The respondents argued that the notice was sent by registered post and, under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, is deemed served. The court, noting the procedural lapse and the parties’ agreement, allowed the petitioner to file a fresh objection within two weeks and directed the competent authority to decide it within a month, maintaining the status‑quo on the land pending resolution. The writ application was therefore disposed without quashing the acquisition notice.
Issues considered
- Was the notice under Section 3(1) of the Pipelines Act validly served on the petitioner?
- Does the alleged non‑service of the Section 3(1) notice invalidate the final declaration of acquisition under Section 6(1)?
- Is the petitioner entitled to a fresh opportunity to object to the acquisition?
- Can the court order a status‑quo pending the filing and disposal of the fresh objection?
Legislation cited
Subjects
- land acquisition
- pipeline
- notice service
- right to object
- procedural fairness
- status quo
- civil writ jurisdiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1351 of 2025
======================================================
Pankaj Prasun Son of Late Upendra Kumar Resident of Baniya Patti, P.S.- K.
Nagar, District- Purnea.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate, Purnea.
2. The District Magistrate, Purnea.
3. The Numaligarh Refinery Limited, through Chairman NRL- Centre, 122A,
G.S. Road, Chritianbasti, Guwahati, Assam- 781005.
4. The Chairman NRL- Centre, 122A, G.S. Road, Chritianbasti, Guwahati,
Assam- 781005.
5. The Managing Director, NRL- Centre, 122A, G.S. Road, Chritianbasti,
Guwahati, Assam- 781005.
6. The Authorised Officer, Numaligarh Refinery Limited, Mahboob Khan Tola,
Near Kali Mandir, Purnea- 854301.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md Fazle Karim
For the Respondent/state : Mr. Vijaya Laxmi Pandit, Advocate
For the Respondent 3-6 : Mr. Dhananjay Kashyap, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
5 19-02-2026 1. Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner has filed the present writ application for
quashing of notice issued by the respondent authority under
Section 6(1) of the Petroleum And Minerals Pipelines
(Acquisition Of Right Of User In Land ) Act, 1962 (for short
“Pipelines Act”) dated 18.01.2024 whereby the land of the
petitioner pertaining to Mauza- Kajha, Thana No. 30, Khata No.
954 & 1037, Plot No. 5871 & 5872 has been declared for
acquisition.
Patna High Court CWJC No.1351 of 2025(5) dt.19-02-2026
2/4
3. The process of acquisition for right of user was started
by the respondent no. 3 to 6 under the Pipelines Act for laying
pipeline for transportation of crude oil from Paradip (Odisha) to
Numaligarh (Assam). The pipeline is proposed to be passing
through the land of the petitioner situated at Mauza – Kajha,
Thana No. 30, Khata No. 954 & 1037, Plot No. 5871 & 5872. A
gazette notification for right to user of the aforesaid land was
published by the respondent authority on 26.10.2021 and notice
under Section 3(1) of the Pipelines Act was issued to the
petitioner inviting objection on 15.03.2022.
4. The contention of the petitioner is that notice under
Section 3(1) of the Pipelines Act was not served upon him,
however, notice of final declaration of acquisition of right of
user dated 18.01.2024 was served upon the petitioner then only
the petitioner came to know about acquisition of his piece of
land for laying down pipeline by the respondents. Final notice
under Section 6(1) of the Pipelines Act was served upon the
petitioner on 16.08.2024. After receipt of the notice, the
petitioner submitted objection before the respondent no. 6 on
21.08.2024 taking objection therein that petitioner has not been
served a notice under Section 3(1) of the Pipelines Act which
was mandatory statutory requirement under the Pipelines Act.
Patna High Court CWJC No.1351 of 2025(5) dt.19-02-2026
3/4
Apart from the same the petitioner also took objection regarding
alignment of acquisition and further availability of alternative
land through which the pipeline can pass through. The objection
of the petitioner has been rejected on 30.08.2024 by the
respondent authority on the ground that objection has been filed
after expiry of twenty one days.
5. The specific contention of the petitioner is that prior to
issuance of notice under Section 6(1) of the Pipelines Act,
Section 3(1) notice was not served. Petitioner submitted
application under right to information Act seeking a copy of
notice under Section 3(1) of the Pipelines Act which was
supplied to the petitioner under R.T.I. on 15.10.2024.
Accordingly, submission is that prior to issuance of final
declaration under Section 6(1) of the Pipelines Act no
opportunity was given to the petitioner to submit his objection
under Section 3(1) of the Pipelines Act.
6. Learned counsel for respondent no. 3 to 6 submits that
notice was served upon the petitioner and was also sent through
registered / speed post. There is presumption under Section 27
of the General Clauses Act that if notice has been sent on the
previously known address of the petitioner it will be deemed to
have been served, however, in the interest of justice the
Patna High Court CWJC No.1351 of 2025(5) dt.19-02-2026
4/4
authority will allow the petitioner to submit a fresh objection
before it which will be decided on merit as per law.
7. Considering the rival submission of the parties, taking
into consideration the nature of dispute and the fact that both the
parties have agreed that the authority may consider and decide
the objection filed by the petitioner afresh, accordingly, the
present writ application is disposed with liberty to the petitioner
to file his objection before the competent authority under the
Pipelines Act within two weeks. If such an objection is filed, the
competent authority shall be obliged to dispose the same within
a period of one month from the date of filing of objection in
accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to the
petitioner.
8. It is made clear that till disposal of objection filed by the
petitioner, status quo existing as of today pertaining to the land
of the petitioner shall be maintained by the parties.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
praful/-
U
Checking your session…