Patna High Court
Suresh SaoversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court held that the land compensation dues have already been fully paid, and therefore the writ petition seeking further payment was dismissed.
Summary
Petitioner Suresh Sao filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State of Bihar and its officials to pay the balance of land compensation due to him. The total compensation of Rs 8,39,350 was calculated, and after a 10% income‑tax deduction, 80% (Rs 7,55,415) was paid on 1 August 2014. The remaining 20% (Rs 2,64,266) after the same deduction resulted in a payment of Rs 2,37,839 on 3 March 2016, which was credited to the petitioner’s bank account. The petition did not contest the calculation of the award, only the alleged non‑payment. The Court examined the payment records, found that the full amount had been disbursed, and noted that any further grievance must be raised before the appropriate authority. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed as there was no unpaid amount to enforce.
Issues considered
- What is the status of the land compensation payment claimed by the petitioner?
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel payment when the amount has already been paid.
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation
- mandamus
- payment of dues
- land reforms
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.24211 of 2018
======================================================
Suresh Sao S/o Late Mangal Sao Resident of Mohalla Nalapar Chowk
Shikarpur,PS Chaowk, PO Ghauganj,Patna City,Dist.Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary,Revenue
Department,Land Reforms,Bihar,Patna
2. The Collector(District Magistrarte) Bihar,Patna
3. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Bihar,Patna
4. The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms,Patna City,Patna
5. The Circle Officer, at Gandhi Maidan,Patna,Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bishwa Nath Upadhyay, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, GP-14
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 13-01-2026 Heard Ms. Anjali Kumari, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, learned GP-14.
2. The present application has been preferred for the
following relief(s):
(i) For issuance of an appropriate
Writ/s, Order/s, Direction/s, directing the
respondents to pay the dues of land
compensation benefit to the petitioner
immediately without demur.
(ii) For issuance of a Writ of
Mandamus, commanding the respondents to
make payment of dues to the petitioner of
land compensation without delay at once.
(iii) Any other relief or reliefs be
Patna High Court CWJC No.24211 of 2018(3) dt.13-01-2026
2/3
granted to the petitioner for which he is
found entitled in the facts as well as in law.
3. The compensation amount of Rs. 8,39, 350/- which
included the structure on the land was calculated and after 10%
I.T. deduction, Rs. 7,55,415 was paid on 01.08.2014. After the
payment of aforesaid 80% amount, the remaining 20% amount
was calculated as Rs. 2,64,266 and after 10% of I.T. deduction,
Rs. 2,37,839/- was paid on 03.03.2016. The eighty per cent
amount that was received by the petitioner, Suresh Sao of Rs.
7,55,415/- is part of the counter affidavit as Annexure A. Again,
so far as Rs. 2,37,839/- is concerned, the record shows that it
was paid in the bank account of in the year 2016.
4. The prayer in the writ petition clearly shows that he
wanted payment and there is nothing on record to show that he
is aggrieved by the calculation and/or the award that has been
made.
5. It seems certain people, namely, Jay Prakash Sah
and Shambhu Sah had earlier made objections which led to
payment of eighty per cent but later twenty per cent has also
been released in favour of the petitioner, Suresh Sao.
6. In that background, in the opinion of the Court,
nothing remains. If the petitioner is still aggrieved, he can very
well move before an appropriate authority/Court but so far as
Patna High Court CWJC No.24211 of 2018(3) dt.13-01-2026
3/3
payment part is concerned, pursuant to the award, the record
shows that the same has been paid.
7. In that background, the writ petition is disposed of.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Vijay Singh/-
U
Checking your session…