Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Sheikh Mahmood @ S. K. MahmoodversusThe Union Of India and Anr

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

The writ petition is dismissed, with the petitioner directed to approach the appropriate authority for compensation.

Summary

Sheikh Mahmood filed a writ petition seeking Rs.5 lakh compensation with interest for damage to his crops caused when Indian Oil Corporation (IOCL) dug his land to repair and double a petroleum pipeline passing through his property in Lakhisarai district. The petitioner alleged that despite a legal notice, IOCL did not compensate for the loss. IOCL contended that the petitioner had not made a proper representation as required by a prior Division Bench judgment in CWJC No.8424 of 2018. The Patna High Court observed that the petitioner's relief was limited to compensation for crop damage and that the appropriate remedy lay before the designated authority, not the High Court. Consequently, the Court directed the petitioner to file a proper petition with supporting documents before the concerned authority, allowing up to three months for disposal, and dismissed the writ petition.

Issues considered

  • What entitlement, if any, does the petitioner have to compensation for crop damage caused by pipeline repair work?
  • Whether the petitioner complied with the procedural requirement of making a proper representation as mandated by the Division Bench judgment in CWJC No.8424 of 2018.

Subjects

  • compensation
  • crop damage
  • pipeline
  • civil writ jurisdiction
  • Indian Oil Corporation
  • land acquisition
  • procedural representation

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21977 of 2018
                 ======================================================
                 Sheikh Mahmood @ S. K. Mahmood Son of Sheikh Rahim, Resident of
                 Village-Ghoshi Kundi, Police Station-Chanan, District-Lakhisarai

                                                                          ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
           1.    The Union Of India.
           2.    The Competent Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Barauni, Kanpur,
                 Pipeline, Barauni, P.O. and P

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s   :    Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Respondent/s   :    Mr. S.D Sanjay Addl. Soc. Gen.
                 For the IOCL           :    Mr. Uday Bhan Singh, Advocate
                                             Ms. Kumari Shreya, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   06-01-2026                 Heard the parties.

                               2. The present petition has been preferred for the

                   following relief(s):

                                            “(i) That an appropriate writ may be

                                  issued commanding upon the respondent no. 2 to

                                  pay the compensation amount of Rs. 5 Lacs along

                                  with the interest thereon till the final payment to

                                  the petitioner against damage and loss caused in

                                  the land of the petitioner under which pipeline has

                                  been laid and doubling by the Respondent no. 2 for

                                  transportation of petroleum.

                                            (ii) Any other relief / reliefs may be
Patna High Court CWJC No.21977 of 2018(5) dt.06-01-2026
                                           2/3




                          granted in favour of the petitioner for which found

                          entitled to.”

                      3. The matter relates to Haldia, Barauni Petroleum

          Pipeline and the petitioner’s land under Lakhisarai district also

          was in the line. Accordingly, he was noticed, payments

          made/compensated.

                      4. The grievance before this Court is that to repair the

          pipeline, the land was dug and in the process, the crops were

          damaged. A legal notice was sent, not replied, aggrieved, the

          present writ petition.

                      5. Learned counsel representing the Indian Oil

          Corporation submits that there is nothing on record to show that

          a proper representation has been made in line with the Division

          Bench judgment in CWJC No. 8424 of 2018 (Prabhakar Kumar

          vs. Union of India & Ors.).

                      6. In view of the limited prayer that the petitioner has

          made regarding the compensation for damage of crops, with the

          consent of parties, this Court deems it appropriate to allow the

          petitioner to file a proper petition alongwith all the supporting

          documents before the appropriate authority who shall be taking

          up the matter and disposing it of preferably in three months

          overlooking the delay in filing the petition as the petitioner was
          Patna High Court CWJC No.21977 of 2018(5) dt.06-01-2026
                                                     3/3




                    pursuing remedy before this Court for last seven years.

                                7. The writ petition stands disposed of with the

                    aforesaid observation.



                                                  (Rajiv Roy, J)
Adnan/-

U


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.