Patna High Court
Triful DeviversusThe Union of India
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The petition must be pursued before a competent civil court, as the writ jurisdiction is not available for the grievance under the National Highways Act.
Summary
The petitioner, Triful Devi, filed a writ petition seeking to quash a divisional commissioner’s order that dismissed her claim under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 on limitation grounds, and to have the arbitration petition maintained for consideration of enhanced compensation for agricultural land acquired for NH‑107. The respondents, including the Union of India, NHAI, and various state officials, contended that the petitioner should approach a competent civil court for relief. The Court examined whether the writ jurisdiction was appropriate for a dispute arising under the National Highways Act and whether the limitation defence could be reviewed via a writ. It held that the petition raised a civil grievance that must be pursued in a civil court, not through a writ petition. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of, granting the petitioner liberty to seek remedy before the appropriate civil forum.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate forum for adjudicating a claim under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 concerning compensation for land acquisition?
- Can a writ petition be entertained to quash a limitation-based dismissal of an arbitration petition under the National Highways Act?
Legislation cited
- National Highways Act, 1956 — s. 3G(5)
Subjects
- Land Acquisition
- Compensation
- Limitation
- Arbitration
- Writ Petition
- Civil Court Jurisdiction
- National Highways Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7492 of 2026
======================================================
Triful Devi W/O - Siyaram Pandit, Resident of Bhirkhi, Ward No. 26, P.O and
P.S -Madhepura, District - Madhepura, Bihar - 852113.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and
Highways, Government of India, Transport Bhawan 1, Sansad Marg, New
Delhi.
2. The Chairman, National Highways Authority of India, Dwarka, New Delhi.
3. The Project Director, National Highways Authority of India (Project
Implementation Unit), NH 107, Office at Janta Chowk, PWD Colony,
District - Purnea, Bihar.
4. The Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department,
Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Bailey Road, Patna.
5. The Divisional Commissioner, Koshi Division, Saharsa.
6. The District Collector, Madhepura, District Madhepura.
7. The Land Acquisition Officer -cum- Competent Authority, Land Acquisition
(CALA), NH -107, Madhepura, District - Madhepura.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anurag Saurav, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. K.K. Singh, AC to SC-10
For the NHAI : Ms. Iti Suman, Advocate
Mr. Ram Tujabh Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 23-06-2026 Heard Mr. Ankesh Bibhu, learned counsel for the
petitioner, Dr. Iti Suman, learned counsel representing the NHAI
and Mr. Krishnakant Singh for the State.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
following relief(s):
“a) For quashing the order dated
13.02.2026 passed by the Respondent No. 5 i.e;
Patna High Court CWJC No.7492 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026
2/3
The Divisional Commissioner, Koshi Division,
Saharsa in Arbitration Case No. 167 of 2025,
whereby and where under the claim of the
Petitioner under Section 3G (5) of the National
Highways Act, 1956 has been rejected on the
ground of limitation.
b) For holding and declaring that the
Arbitration Petition filed by the Petitioner under
Section 3 G (5) of the National Highways Act, 1956
is maintainable and fit to be decided on the merits.
c) For directing the Respondent
authorities, especially Respondent No. 5 to
consider the claim of this Petitioner for the
enhancement of compensation amount over the
lands bearing in Khata No. 15 (New), Khesra No.
369 and 370 having areas of 0.11120 acre and
0.26440 acre respectively under Mauza Amanat
Uttarbadi, Thana No. 68, which have been
acquired by virtue of the declaration made in the
Gazette Publication dated 09.06.2016 for the
purpose of construction/widening of National
Highway 107 (Maheshkhunt - Sonbarsaraj
Patna High Court CWJC No.7492 of 2026(2) dt.23-06-2026
3/3
Madhepura - Purnea Section), Saharsa
considering the nature of the lands as Agricultural.
d) For grant of any other relief/reliefs as
the Petitioner is entitled in the eye of law.”
3. At the outset, learned counsel representing the
respondents jointly submit that the petitioner has to move before
the competent Civil Court for the redressal of the grievance.
4. In that background, the writ petition stands
disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to seek remedy as
mandated under law by moving before a competent Civil Court.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Adnan/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.