Patna High Court
Pashupati ChaudhryversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner must pursue his representation before the concerned administrative authorities and therefore did not grant the writ of mandamus.
Summary
Petitioner Pashupati Chaudhry filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State of Bihar and its officials to exclude his 0.35 decimal land from the SH-56 Bypass road alignment and to stay any acquisition, alleging that alternative land is available. He had earlier approached the Circle Officer and the Executive Engineer of the Road Construction Department with his grievance. The State counsel argued that the matter was pending before the concerned officer and would be dealt with according to law. The Court, after hearing both sides, held that the petitioner must continue his representation before the administrative authorities that have already received his petition. Consequently, the Court did not issue any writ and disposed of the petition with the observation that the respondents should decide the matter. The order effectively dismissed the petition without granting the relief sought.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can issue a mandamus directing the State authorities to exclude the petitioner's land from a road alignment and stay its acquisition.
- Whether the petitioner is required to pursue his grievance through the administrative channels before seeking judicial intervention.
Subjects
- road construction
- land acquisition
- mandamus
- writ petition
- public purpose
- administrative law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1751 of 2026
======================================================
Pashupati Chaudhry son of Chandrasekhar Chaudhry Resident of Village-
Paro, Post- Hirni, PS- Kusheshwar Asthan, District-Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar x
2. The Principal Secretary Road Construction Department, Government of
Bihar
3. The District Magistrate Darbhanga
4. The District Land Acquisition officer Darbhanga
5. The Executive Engineer Road construction Department, Division Benipur,
Darbhanga.
6. The circle officer Kusheshwar Asthan, Darbhanga
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Navin Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Saroj Kr. Sharma, AC to AAG-3
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 03-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The present application has been preferred:
for the issuance of an appropriate
writ/ writs, order/direction/nature of
directions Mandamus orders, in the to the
appropriate authority/ respondent to
commanding official Respondents to exclude
the petitioner's land bearing khata no. 136,
khesra no.-579, 595, area 0.35 decimal.
From the SH-56 Bypass road alignment and
acquisition and stay the road construction
from the petitioner's land as the petitioner
has no other commercial land and
Patna High Court CWJC No.1751 of 2026(2) dt.03-02-2026
2/3
alternative government road land is
available near the petitioner's land.
(B) For issuance of an appropriate
writ preferable in the nature of mandamus
commanding upon the respondents
authorities to prevent acquision of
petitioner's land.
(C) For issuance of any other
appropriate writ/ writs, order/orders,
direction/ directions as your honour may
deem fit and proper in facts and
circumstances of the case.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for
the redressal fo the grievance, he approached the Circle Officer,
Kusheshwar Asthan, Darbhanga by filing a petition duly
received by the office (Annexure-2 to the petition). Further, he
has also moved before the Executive Engineer, Road
Construction Department, Road Division, Benipur, Darbhanga.
4. Learned State Counsel submits that the concerned
Officer shall be taking up the matter and disposing it of in
accordance with law.
5. Believing the words of the learned State Counsel
and directing the petitioner to pursue the representation that has
been preferred before the respondents, the writ petition is
disposed of.
Patna High Court CWJC No.1751 of 2026(2) dt.03-02-2026
3/3
6. If the petitioner approaches the concerned
respondents who have duly received the petition, have to take a
decision in the matter.
7. The writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid
observation.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Vijay Singh/-
U
Checking your session…