Patna High Court
Dr. Prakash Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar,
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court held that only the earlier acquisition of 0.95 acres is valid and any further acquisition or demolition of the remaining land must await a reasoned order from the Additional Chief Secretary after hearing all stakeholders, with interim protection remaining in force.
Summary
The petitioners, owners of a 2‑acre raiyati land parcel in Bihta, Patna, claimed that the State of Bihar and the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) illegally demolished parts of their property and were attempting to acquire an additional 0.085 acres beyond the 0.95 acres already lawfully acquired in 2012‑13. They filed a writ petition seeking directions for the respondents to halt demolition, produce reports on pending applications, and pay compensation for the alleged illegal acquisition. The State argued that the new highway alignment required only 0.085 acres and that a proposal had been sent to NHAI for approval, while NHAI relied on a 1933 Gazette notification asserting prior acquisition of the plot. The Court observed that only the earlier acquisition of 0.95 acres was substantiated and that the claim of a 1933 acquisition was not clear. It directed the Additional Chief Secretary of the Revenue and Land Reforms Department to convene all stakeholders, hear the matter, and issue a reasoned order, while maintaining the interim protection previously granted. The petition was consequently disposed with these observations.
Issues considered
- Whether the State's proposed acquisition of an additional 0.085 acres of the petitioners' land is lawful without following due process.
- Whether the demolition of portions of the petitioners' building, which were not part of the previously acquired 0.95 acres, is illegal.
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to compensation for the alleged illegal demolition and acquisition.
- Whether the NHAI's reliance on the 1933 Gazette notification establishes a valid acquisition of the disputed plot.
- Whether the interim protection granted to the petitioners should continue pending a decision by the Additional Chief Secretary.
Subjects
- land acquisition
- illegal demolition
- compensation
- interim protection
- NHAI
- Revenue and Land Reforms Department
- Bihar
- civil writ jurisdiction
- gazette notification
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14480 of 2024
======================================================
1. Dr. Prakash Kumar Singh S/o Late Jyoti Kumar Singh R/o- Bihta, P.S and
Post- Bihta, Patna, Bihar- 801103.
2. Pradeep Kumar S/o Dr. Prakash Kumar Singh, R/o- Bihta, P.S and Post-
Bihta, Patna, Bihar- 801103.
3. Piyush Kumar Singh S/o Late Pramod Kumar Singh R/o- Bihta Cold
Storage Campus, P.S and Post- Bihta, Patna, Bihar- 801103 (Legal Heir of
Late Pramod Kumar Singh).
4. Rohit Kumar Singh S/o Late Pramod Kumar Singh R/o- Flat No. 1948,
Vasto Tower, Mahagun Moderne, Sector 78, Noida, P.S- Sector 49, Post-
Noida HO, Uttar Pradesh- 201301 (Legal Heir of Late Pramod Kumar
Singh).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar, through Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue and
Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Directorate of Land Records and Survey, Government of Bihar through
its Director.
4. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Patna.
5. The Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Patna, Bihar.
6. The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Danapur, District- Patna, Bihar.
7. The Circle Officer, Block- Bihta, District- Patna, Bihar.
8. Ciegall India Limited, through its Managing Director, Registered Office A-
898, Tagore Nagar, Ludhiana, Punjab- 141001.
9. National Highways Authority of India, through its Project Director, Project
Implementation Unit, D-63, Sri Krishnapuri, Patna-800001.
10. The Additional Chief Secretary, Road Construction Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manu Tripurari, Advocate
: Mr. Apurv Harsh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Standing Counsel (6)
: Mr. Wasi Mohammad, AC to SC-6
For the NHAI : Mr. Dr. Maurya Vijay Chandra, Advocate
: Mr. Gaurav Govinda, Advocate
: Mr. Preety Ranjan, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
Patna High Court CWJC No.14480 of 2024(6) dt.13-03-2026
2/7
ORAL ORDER
6 13-03-2026 Heard Mr. Manu Tripurari, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Dr. Maurya Vijay Chandra, learned counsel
representing the National Highway Authority of India beside
Mr. Md. Wasi Mohammad, learned AC to SC-6 representing the
State.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
grant of following relief(s):
“(i) for issuance of
directions/writ/appropriate order/s directing the
Respondents to take proper action and to
conclude the pending applications/
representations regarding illegal demolition/
acquisition of land and buildings thereon
bearing details as Khata 452, Khesra/Plot 1902,
Anchal/Block-Bihta, Halka Shrirampur, Mauja
Mahadeopur Phulari, Thana/P. S. No. - 53.
(ii) issuance of writ/order/direction to
direct Respondent No. 4, 5. 6, and 7 to produce
report on action taken on receipt of written
applications/representations of the Petitioners
sent via Registered Post.
(iii) issuance of other writ/order/direction to
Patna High Court CWJC No.14480 of 2024(6) dt.13-03-2026
3/7
Respondents for payment of compensation within
a specific time frame to the Petitioners in lieu of
illegal demolition and acquisition bypassing the
procedure established by law.
3. The petitioners own a piece of land at Mauja-
Mahadeopur Phulari, Khata No.452, Khesra/Plot-1902,
Thana/P.S No.53, Area- 2 acres 68 decimals in the district of
Patna which is raiyati land of the petitioner and purchased by
way of registered sale deed in the year 1953.
4. According to the petitioners, the companies that are
functioning on the said land include Mahindra Tractor
Showroom, Mahindra Service Centre, Hindustan Petroleum
Outlet, Bajaj Motorcycle Showroom and Service Centre beside
the Bhola Cement Shop and some vacant land.
5. Earlier, the State Government vide Land
Acquisition Case No. 81 of 2012-13 acquired 0.95 acres of the
said plot belonging to the petitioners and payments also made
and there is no dispute on this regard between the parties.
6. The problem started when the State Government
decided to come up with an elevated corridor and it was found
that the additional lands are required on the other end of the
plot.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14480 of 2024(6) dt.13-03-2026
4/7
7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that if
the State Government intends to acquire 0.085 acres on land.
Further, they have resorted to the acquisition proceeding and in
the garb of earlier acquisition of 0.95 acres of land, they want to
usurp the land of the petitioners.
8. The contention is that when they put mark on the
building for the demolition, a representation was submitted
before the District Magistrate, Patna on 14.05.2024 (Annexure-
P/6) copies of which were also sent to the concerned authority
including the District Land Acquisition Officer, Patna and the
Circle Officer, Bihta.
9. The submission is that in the meantime, they
resorted to demolish certain portion of the building forcing the
petitioner to rush to the Patna High Court which followed grant
of interim protection by a coordinate bench of this Court on
17.06.2025 which has further been extended.
10. The voluminous writ petition shows that number
of affidavits have come from both the sides and the contention
of the State Government duly signed by the District Land
Acquisition Officer, Patna is that they acquired 0.95 acres of
land earlier for which payments have been made but due to
change in the alignment, instead of aforesaid earlier acquired
Patna High Court CWJC No.14480 of 2024(6) dt.13-03-2026
5/7
area of Plot No. 1902, the present requirement is only 0.085
acres. It further records that a proposal has been sent to the
National Highway Authority of India but the approval is
awaited.
11. The aforesaid affidavit of the State Government is
not clear on the point as to whether the new alignment requires
additional 0.085 acres of the petitioner for which they intend to
resort to fresh acquisition process and/or it is to be constituted
the earlier acquired land of 0.95 acres.
12. Dr. Maurya representing “the NHAI” has taken
this Court to the notification issued by the Revenue
Department, Bihar on 9th of June, 1933 (under the Bihar and
Orissa Gazette) which amongst the other include the plot
no.1902.
13. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that
they have rebutted the said notification stand of ‘the NHAI’ by
way of rejoinder and the stand is that payment was never made
and they had peaceful possession of the land for the eighty
years.
14. This Court has taken note of the entire facts and is
of the opinion that one acquisition took place with regard to
only 0.95 acres of land whereas learned counsel representing
Patna High Court CWJC No.14480 of 2024(6) dt.13-03-2026
6/7
‘the NHAI’ has brought on record another Gazette notification
of the year 1933 to show that he plot no. 1902 stands acquired in
the said year 1933.
15. In the aforesaid backdrop, since all the
documents/record are available with the erstwhile Revenue
Department (presently Revenue and Land Reforms
Department) Bihar, it would be appropriate that the Additional
Chief Secretary of the said department (respondent no.2) takes a
decision in the matter after summoning all the stakeholders
including ‘the NHAI’, the petitioners, the District Magistrate,
Patna as also the District Land Acquisition Officer, Patna and
hearing them.
16. Needless to add, opportunities have to be granted
to all the stakeholders before a reasoned order is passed.
17. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
they shall be filing an appropriate petition in next eight weeks
before the respondent no.2, the Additional Chief Secretary,
Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of
Bihar, Patna. If such petition is filed, the respondent no.2 shall
be noticing the parties and shall take the matter to its logical
conclusion by a reasoned order at an earliest, preferably within a
period of next three months.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14480 of 2024(6) dt.13-03-2026
7/7
18. Till the Additional Chief Secretary, Revenue and
Land Reforms Department, Bihar takes a decision, the
protection granted to the petitioners by the coordinate Bench on
17.06.2025 shall continue.
19. It is further made clear that if the Additional
Chief Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Bihar
comes to the conclusion that the demolition took place of the
building which has not been acquired, the petitioner shall be
free to take appropriate steps for grant of compensation in
accordance with law.
20. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid
observation.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U
Checking your session…