Patna High Court
Baidhnath PrasadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court held that the land has not been acquired and therefore dismissed the writ petition, allowing the petitioner to file a fresh petition if necessary.
Summary
Baidhnath Prasad filed a writ petition alleging that his land in Sheohar district had been acquired for State Highway 54 without any notice, proceeding or compensation, purportedly under the Land Acquisition Act. The respondents, including the State of Bihar and various officials, submitted a counter‑affidavit stating that the highway project is 75% complete and that the land in question has not yet been acquired. The court examined the affidavits and found the petitioner’s apprehension unfounded, noting the categorical declaration by the authorities that acquisition had not occurred. Consequently, the court held that no illegal acquisition had taken place and that any future acquisition must comply with statutory requirements. The petition was disposed of, with the court directing the petitioner to file a fresh petition within eight weeks, after which the Collector will hear the matter and pass a reasoned order. The State counsel raised no objection to this direction.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner’s land has been lawfully acquired for the State Highway 54 project without notice, proceeding, or compensation.
- Whether the writ petition seeking restraint of the alleged acquisition can be entertained.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- land acquisition
- writ petition
- compensation
- notice
- public works
- procedural fairness
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17492 of 2023
======================================================
Baidhnath Prasad Son of Late Ramchandra Sah, Resident of Village-
Singhani, Ward No.11, Sangani Indarwa, District- Sheohar, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Collector, District- Sheohar.
2. The Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur.
3. The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, District- Sheohar.
4. The Circle Officer, Circle Office, Piprahi, District- Sheohar.
5. The Land Acquisition Officer, Land Acquisition Office, District- Sheohar.
6. The Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, Bagmati Division,
Sheohar, District- Sheohar.
7. The Executive Engineer, Additional Road Division, Sheohar, District-
Sheohar.
8. The Assistant Engineer, Additional Road Division, Chakiya, District-
Motihari.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Madhusudan Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Mujtabul Haque, G.P.- 12
Mr. Manish Kumar, AC to GP-12
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 20-04-2026 Heard Mr.Madhusudan Kumar, learned counsel for
the petitioner and the State.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
following relief/s:
(i) this writ petition is to restrain the
authorities concerned the land of the
petitioner has been acquired for State
Highway 54 (P.W.D. Road) for joint of
Patna High Court CWJC No.17492 of 2023(3) dt.20-04-2026
2/4
District Sheohar and District- Motihari
without any notice to the petitioner, without
any proceeding or without any compensation
and which section of land Acquisition Act.
Suo-Motuly as desired by them the
authorities have acquired the land of the
petitioner.
3. The counter affidavit/supplementary counter
affidavit have come and the last affidavit of the respondent no.5
duly signed by the D.C.L.R., Sheohar, in paragraph-16 has
recorded as under:
16. That in cost of repetition it is
humbly submit that the project of State
Highway 54 (P.W.D. Road) for joint of
District- Sheohar and District- East
Champaran (Motihari) which has been
75% project has been completed upto
small bridge as per 1" Survey Map by
the authorities and not to divert 40
meter back through Khesra No.835
under Thana No.123 and proceed the
project work towards small bridge for
Patna High Court CWJC No.17492 of 2023(3) dt.20-04-2026
3/4
which the work has been left out.
4. This statement of the respondents that the land
acquisition is under process and the land of the petitioner has
still not been acquired has no rebuttal despite the fact that copy
was served upon the learned counsel for the petitioner on
11.07.2024.
5. This Court is convinced that the apprehension of
the petitioner is unfounded when a categorical statement has
been made by the respondent authorities that his land has still
not been acquired.
6. If the situation so warrant and the respondents
change track and decided to go for the acquisition, it has to be
done only in accordance with law and not otherwise.
7. Again, the liberty shall be with the petitioner to
agitate the matter afresh if he thinks that the respondents are
acting in a irrational manner and not in accordance with law.
8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that he may be allowed to file a fresh
petition/representation alongwith copy of this order so that the
Collector, Sheohar could decide the matter in accordance with
the law.
Patna High Court CWJC No.17492 of 2023(3) dt.20-04-2026
4/4
9. Learned State counsel has no objection.
10. The writ petition is disposed of with the
observation if the petitioner files a fresh petition alongwith all
the supporting documents in eight weeks, the Collector, Sheohar
shall be taking up the matter and after hearing the parties will
pass a reasoned order.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/-
U
Checking your session…