Patna High Court
Sumitra DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The petition is dismissed as the State has already paid the full compensation amount to the petitioner.
Summary
Petitioner Sumitra Devi filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State authorities to pay compensation with 18% interest for land acquired from her. The State, through a counter‑affidavit, asserted that full compensation of Rs.14,87,608 had already been paid to her. The petitioner disputed this claim, but the court noted that the State’s reply dated 17‑02‑2020 had not been rebutted. Finding the State’s averment credible and unchallenged, the court concluded that there was no basis to grant further relief. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of.
Issues considered
- What is the entitlement of the petitioner to additional compensation and interest for the acquired land?
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing payment of compensation when the State claims full payment has already been made.
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation
- mandamus
- interest
- civil writ jurisdiction
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17591 of 2019
======================================================
Sumitra Devi W/o Late Devnandan Prasad Resident of village- Daniawan,
Post and P.S.- Daniawan, Dist- Patna, at present Mohalla - Chaitnya Nagar,
Bhagwagt Nagar, Kumharar, P.S.- AgamKuan, Dist- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through, Principal Secretary, Bihar land and Revenue
Department, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate Patna.
3. The District Land Acquisition Officer Patna Samaharnalay, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anand Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Rishi Raj Sinha, SC-19
: Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, AC to SC-19
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 19-01-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
grant of following relief(s):
“(i) for issuance of an appropriate
writ in the nature of Mandamus for commanding
and directing the respondent authorities
concerned to make payment of compensation
amount to the petitioner with interest @ 18% to
the petitioner for acquired land.
(ii) for issuance of any other
appropriate writ/writs, order/orders,
direction/directions for which the writ petitioner
Patna High Court CWJC No.17591 of 2019(3) dt.19-01-2026
2/2
will be found entitled in the facts and
circumstances of the case.”
3. A counter affidavit has come on behalf of the
respondent no.2 and 3 and learned State counsel has taken this
Court to paragraph nos. 6 and 7 to show that as per the State
Government, so far as the share of Sumitra Devi is concerned,
the 100% compensation amount has been given to her
(Rs.14,87,608/-)
4. Though learned counsel for the petitioner dispute
the same, a perusal of the notice would show that reply was
received by his on office on 17.02.2020 and there is no
rebuttal/rejoinder to that.
5. Allowing her to agitate the matter if she still has
any grievance, this Court being convinced with the averment
made by the State respondents in the counter affidavit, the writ
petition is disposed of.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U
Checking your session…