Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Sanjay Kumar SinghversusThe Union of India

Decided
Disposal
WITHDRAWN

Holding

The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

Summary

Petitioner Sanjay Kumar Singh filed a writ petition in the Patna High Court seeking a writ to restrain the Union of India, the State of Bihar, NHAI and other authorities from taking possession of his land and to compel payment of full compensation, 100% solatium and interest under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, treating the land as commercial. The petition also sought compensation for the house and shops constructed on the land. The petitioner’s counsel later moved for withdrawal of the petition. The Court entertained the withdrawal application and dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn. No substantive merits of the land acquisition or compensation claims were adjudicated.

Issues considered

  • What relief, if any, could be granted to the petitioner regarding the alleged unlawful acquisition of his land?
  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to compensation, solatium and interest under the 2013 Land Acquisition Act.
  • Whether the petition should be dismissed on the ground of withdrawal.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • land acquisition
  • compensation
  • solatium
  • withdrawal of petition
  • Patna High Court
  • Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013
  • commercial land

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8962 of 2025
                 ======================================================
                 Sanjay Kumar Singh Son of Late Ram Jyotish Singh, Resident of Village and
                 P.O. - Bishunpura, P.S. - Bihta, District- Patna.

                                                                         ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                 Versus
           1.    The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and
                 Highway, New Delhi.
           2.    The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land
                 Reforms Department, Bihar, Patna.
           3.    The National Highway Authority of India through its Project Director,
                 Project Implementation Unit, Vivekanand Marg, Boring Road, Patna.
           4.    The Project Director, Project Implementation Unit, NHAI, Vivekanand
                 Marg, Boring Road, Patna.
           5.    The District Magistrate, Patna.
           6.    The Competent Authority cum District Land Acquisition Officer, Patna.
           7.    The Sub Divisional Officer, Danapur, Patna.
           8.    The Circle Officer, Bihta, Patna.

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s   :        Mr.Purushotam Sharma, Advocate
                 For the Respondent/s   :        Mr.Additional Solicitor General
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   12-05-2026                 Heard the parties.

                               2. The present petition has been preferred for the

                   following relief/s:

                                            (i) for issuance an appropriate writ for

                                            directing and commanding the respondents

                                            not to come over and take possession of the

                                            land of petitioner pertaining to Khata No-83,

                                            Thana No-58, Plot No-390 Area 04 Decimal
Patna High Court CWJC No.8962 of 2025(3) dt.12-05-2026
                                            2/3




                                  of Mauza Sri Rampur and Khata No-132

                                  Thana No-57, Plot NO-992, Area 02

                                  Decimal Land of Mauza Bishumberpur

                                  under Circle Bihta over which the House of

                                  petitioner and shops/office are constructed

                                  and standing, without start the acquisition

                                  process of the said land and house etc. of

                                  petitioner in accordance with law as well as

                                  unless and until the petitioner is not paid the

                                  amount of compensation, 100% soletium and

                                  interest at market rate by treating the said

                                  land of petitioner is commercial land,

                                  according to the provisions of Right to Fair

                                  Compensation and Transparency in Land

                                  Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement

                                  Act 2013 (Hereinafter to be referred as the

                                  act 2013);

                                  (ii) for issuance of an appropriate writ,

                                  order       or     direction   directing   and

                                  commanding the respondents to pay the

                                  petitioner the amount of compensation,

                                  100% Saletium and interest according to the
         Patna High Court CWJC No.8962 of 2025(3) dt.12-05-2026
                                                     3/3




                                           provisions of the aforesaid Act 2013 for his

                                           aforesaid land at market rate by treating the

                                           said land of the petitioner as commercial, as

                                           well as for the house of the petitioner and

                                           shops constructed and standing over the said

                                           land before their acquisition in accordance

                                           with law;

                                           (iii.) for any order relief/reliefs of which the

                                           petitioner is legally entitle to.

                                3. Mr.Purushotam Sharma, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner prays for withdrawal of the writ petition.

                                4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as

                   withdrawn.



                                                 (Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/-

U


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.