Patna High Court
Satyajit Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The petition is dismissed because the petitioner failed to establish authority to represent his wife for the compensation claim.
Summary
The petitioner, Satyajit Kumar Singh, filed a writ petition seeking (i) completion of the bedding work of a gas pipeline by GAIL, (ii) payment of compensation to his wife Anu Singh and two other family members under the Right of User, (iii) a no‑objection certificate for his land, and (iv) a mandamus directing the respondents to comply with an earlier order dated 5 April 2018 that mandated compensation under Section 10 of the Petroleum and Minerals‑Pipelines Act, now read with Section 26 of the Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The respondents argued that the petitioner had not produced a power of attorney or affidavit authorising him to represent his wife. The Court observed that while a citizen’s liberty to approach the authorities is recognised, the petition lacked the necessary documentation to establish the wife’s authority, and consequently the petition was disposed of without granting the reliefs. The decision rests on procedural deficiency rather than the merits of the compensation claim.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner can claim compensation on behalf of his wife without a power of attorney or affidavit.
- Whether the Court can issue a mandamus directing completion of the gas pipeline work and payment of compensation under the Petroleum and Minerals‑Pipelines Act and LARR Act.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- gas pipeline
- compensation
- Right of User
- mandamus
- land acquisition
- LARR Act
- Petroleum and Minerals‑Pipelines Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5993 of 2024
======================================================
Satyajit Kumar Singh S/o or C/o Kaushlendra Pratap Narayan Singh, R/o
Village- Poiwan, P.S. - Muffasil, District - Aurangabad.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Bihar.
2. The District Magistrate-cum-Collector-cum Land Acquisition officer
Aurangabad.
3. The Additional District Magistrate, Aurangabad.
4. The Deputy Collector of Land Reforms (DCLR), Aurangabad.
5. The Circle Officer, Aurangabad.
6. The Deputy General Manager of GAIL India Limited, Gaya.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Mukul Kumari, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Government Pleader 22
: Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, AC to GP-22
For the GAIL : Mr. Uday Bhan Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
5 28-04-2026 Hears Mrs. Mukul Kumari, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Uday Bhan Singh, learned counsel
representing the Gas Authority of India Limited and Mr. Rakesh
Ranjan, learned AC to GP-22.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
grant of following relief(s):
“(i) to completed the work of the bedding of
Gas Pipeline by the GAIL India Limited,
Aurangabad as soon as possible.
(ii) to pay the compensation amount
according to the Right of User (ROU) to the wife
Patna High Court CWJC No.5993 of 2024(5) dt.28-04-2026
2/3
of the petitioner namely Anu Singh and two
others 1. Sanjiti Devi @ Sanjiti Singh, 2. Babli
Singh since 2019 to till date whatever they are
entitled to.
(iii) to give the no objection of the land
of the petitioner in his possession after
completing the work by the respondent
authorities.
(iv) to issuance of writ in nature of
mandamus or any appropriate writ/ Writs, order
and direction to direct the respondent authorities
to pay the compensation amount to the
petitioner.
(v) for non compliance of the order
dated 05.04.2018 passed by the Deputy
Collector of Land Reforms, Aurangabad
whereby and where under it has clearly
disclosed that the Raiatea will get the
compensation amount under section 10 of the
Petroleum and Minerals-Pipelines Act (PMP)
-1962 which has been converted into section 26
of the Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and
Patna High Court CWJC No.5993 of 2024(5) dt.28-04-2026
3/3
Resettlement Act (LARRA), 2013 in light of
notification dated 28.08.2015 by the Central
Government of India. It has further disclosed
that the GAIL India Limited, Aurangabad will
pay the compensation amount under section 26
of the LARR Act 2013 to all the Raiyatee who are
entitled to.”
3. At the outset, learned counsel representing the
respondents submit that the petitioner is batting for Anu Devi
(his wife) and there is nothing on record to show that she has
given power of attorney and/or any affidavit has been attached
with the writ petition in this regard.
4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that it will suffice if Anu Devi is allowed to agitate the
matter before appropriate respondent authority.
5. The said liberty is always always available to a
citizen much less the wife of the petitioner. The writ petition is
disposed of with the aforesaid observation.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U
Checking your session…