Patna High Court
Sundarwati DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court directed the District Magistrate‑cum‑Collector to examine the revenue records and lease agreement to determine the petitioners' entitlement to higher compensation and disposed of the writ petition.
Summary
The petitioners, heirs of a deceased landowner, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State to set aside a letter that allegedly misreported the Minimum Valuation Report (MVR) for land acquisition for a road widening project, and to award compensation calculated at twice the residential rate as per the Bihar Private Land Lease Policy, 2014. They contended that they had deposited the requisite amount based on the MVR and that the District Magistrate‑cum‑Collector is the competent authority to consider their grievance. The court examined the petition and observed that the petitioners had already approached the District Magistrate for relief. It directed the District Magistrate to promptly call for the relevant revenue records and the lease agreement dated 18‑09‑2024, and to determine whether the petitioners are entitled to a higher compensation based on the prevailing MVR. The court further warned that if the revenue authority fails to act, the petitioners may pursue further legal action. With these directions, the writ petition was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the respondents wrongly reported the Minimum Valuation Report (MVR) for the land acquisition.
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to compensation at twice the residential land rate under the Bihar Private Land Lease Policy, 2014.
- Whether the District Magistrate‑cum‑Collector is the appropriate authority to examine and decide the petitioners' claim.
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation
- Minimum Valuation Report
- mandamus
- road widening
- Bihar Private Land Lease Policy, 2014
- District Magistrate
- writ petition
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2798 of 2026
======================================================
1. Sundarwati Devi Wife of Late Raj Kishor Narayan Ray
2. Satish Kumar Ray Son of Late Raj Kishor Narayan Ray
3. Shyam Sundari Devi, Wife of Ram Pukar Ray,
All Resident of Village- Darba, Police Station- Halai, District- Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Road
Construction Department, Patna-800001.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms,
Government of Bihar, Patna-800001.
3. The Engineer-in-Chief (Headquarter), Road Construction Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna-800015.
4. The District Magistrate, at Samastipur, District- Samastipur.
5. The Executive Engineer, Road Construction Department, Road Division,
Samastipur-848101.
6. The District Land Acquisition Officer at Samastipur, District- Samastipur.
7. The Sub-Registrar, Samastipur, District- Samastipur.
8. The Sub-Registrar, Sahpur Patori Sub-Division, District- Samastipur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Narendra Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Standing Counsel (28)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 27-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners and the learned counsel for the State.
2. The petitioners in paragraph no. 1 of the present
writ petition have sought inter alia following relief(s), which is
reproduced hereinafter:-
Patna High Court CWJC No.2798 of 2026(2) dt.27-02-2026
2/4
“(i) A writ in the nature of mandamus or
any other appropriate writ, order or orders, direction
commanding the respondents and to set-aside the
Letter No. 637 dt. 04.07.2023 issued by the
Respondent No. 06 whereby he has been wrongly
reported the minimum valuation report (MVR) of
land for acquisition of landed property of the
Petitioners for widening the PWD Road Indrawara-
Maricha (Via Keval Asthan) at Village Darba, P.S.
Halai, District Samastipur.
(ii). For issuance of the appropriate writ
directing the respondents to pay the compensation
based on the MVR provided by the Respondent No.
08 vide Letter No. 145 dt. 06.11.2024 whereby MVR
of the land adjacent to NH/SH/PWD Road which has
not been earmarked as commercial land and if it
would be used for commercial then its valuation
should be calculated at the rate of twice of residential
land.
(iii) For issuance of the appropriate writ
directing to the respondents to calculate the
compensation at the rate of twice of residential land
i.e @ Rs.92000/- per decimal by using multiplayer of
four as per Bihar Private Land Lease Policy, 2014
and pay Rs. 14,18,640/- to the Petitioner No. 01 and
Rs. 50,30,400/- to the Petitioner No. 02 and Re.
13,24,800/- to the Petitioner No. 03 along with due
interest since the day of acquisition.
(iv) For any other relief /reliefs for which
the Petitioners may be found entitled in the facts and
circumstances of the case.”
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submitted that the petitioners have already
represented before the District Magistrate-cum-Collector,
Samastipur for the reliefs as prayed for in the present writ
petition.
Patna High Court CWJC No.2798 of 2026(2) dt.27-02-2026
3/4
4. Learned counsel further submitted that the
petitioners have deposited the requisite amount with the State
Government in accordance with the prevailing Minimum
Valuation Register (MVR) as determined by the Sub-Registrar,
Samastipur and in terms of the minimum value of the land, as
duly reflected and incorporated in the lease agreement. The
learned counsel submitted that the District Magistrate- cum
-Collector is the Competent Authority to take notice of the said
information and redress the grievance of the petitioners.
5. In view of the averments made in the present writ
petition and the reliefs as sought for therein, the learned District
Magistrate-cum-Collector, Samastipur is directed to forthwith
call for the relevant revenue records, as well as, the lease
agreement executed between the petitioners and the State
Government on 18.09.2024 and to examine whether the
petitioners are entitled to a higher amount on the basis of the
prevailing MVR as on the date of execution of the said lease
agreement and to dispose of the representation of the petitioners
expeditiously in accordance with law.
6. In case, the Revenue Authority of the State
Government sit tight over the representation of the petitioners,
then the petitioners have liberty to take action against them in
Patna High Court CWJC No.2798 of 2026(2) dt.27-02-2026
4/4
accordance with law.
7. With the above observation/direction, the present
writ petition stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
chn/-
U
Checking your session…