Patna High Court
Bindeshwar RoyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The High Court declined to quash the arbitration order and disposed of the writ petition, directing the petitioner to seek relief in a civil court.
Summary
The petitioner, Bindeshwar Roy, filed a writ petition in the Patna High Court seeking to quash an order dated 26-10-2023 issued by the Commissioner‑cum‑Arbitrator of Tirhut Division, which rejected his claim for compensation on the basis that his acquired land was commercial. He also requested that the compensation be determined on the basis of the land's commercial nature rather than residential. The petition alleged that the arbitration order was erroneous and that he was entitled to higher compensation. The court heard arguments from counsel for the petitioner, the State, and the National Highway Authority of India. After hearing, the court granted the petitioner liberty to approach the appropriate civil court for redress and disposed of the writ petition without interfering with the arbitration order.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate forum for challenging the arbitration order rejecting the petitioner's compensation claim?
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to compensation based on the commercial classification of the land rather than residential.
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation
- arbitration
- writ jurisdiction
- high court
- commercial land
- civil court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5509 of 2024
======================================================
Bindeshwar Roy Son of Late Babu Lal Ray, Resident of Village- Bajitpur
Majhauli, P.S.- Bochahan, District- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The Commissioner-cum-Arbitrator, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur.
3. The D.M.-cum-Collector, Muzaffarpur,
4. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Muzaffarpur.
5. National Highway Authority Of India, through its Project Director, NH-
527C, Muzaffarpur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan, Advocate
: Mrs. Bela Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Government Pleader 11
For the NHAI : Mr. Saket Tiwary, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 05-05-2026 Heard Mrs. Bela Singh, learned counsel for the
petitioner and learned counsel representing the State as also
learned counsel for the National Highway Authority of India.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
grant of following relief(s):
“(i) for directing and commanding the
respondent to quash the order dated 26.10.23
(Ann-4) passed by respondent no.-2, the
Commissioner -cum- Arbitrator, Tirhut Division,
Muzaffarpur in Arbitration case no. 66/2019
"Bindeshwar Rai Vrs. State Government and
Patna High Court CWJC No.5509 of 2024(2) dt.05-05-2026
2/2
others" by which he has rejected the claim of
compensation to the petitioner on basis of nature
of his acquired land as commercial.
(ii) for directing and commanding the
respondent to pay the compensation of his
acquired land on basis of commercial nature of
the land in place of residential in nature.
(iii) and also for any other relief/
relieves for which petitioners are found to be
legally entitled under the facts and
circumstances of the case.”
3. After some argument, learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that he shall be approaching the competent
Civil Court for the redressal of the grievance.
4. Granting said liberty, the writ petition is disposed
of.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U
Checking your session…