Patna High Court
Shiv Kumar Mahto vs The State Of Bihar on 22 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5604 of 2020
======================================================
Shiv Kumar Mahto, S/o Jitan Mahto, resident of Village - Ner, P.S.-
Makhdumpur, District- Jehanabad.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land
Reforms Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate Cum Collector, Jehanabad.
3. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Jehanabad.
4. The Deputy Collector Land Reform, District- Jehanabad.
5. The Circle Officer, Makhdumpur, District- Jehanabad.
6. The Chairman National Highway Authority of India, New Delhi.
7. The General Manager, National Highway Authority of India, New Delhi.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Shankar Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Dhurjati Kumar, GP-14
For the NHAI : Mr. S.N. Pathak, SC
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 22-11-2021
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the respondents.
2. The following reliefs as formulated by the petitioner
have been claimed in the writ petition -
"(i) To issue an appropriate order/s, direction/s including a writ
preferably in the nature of CERTIORARI for quashing the letter
no. 635/DLA dated 09.08.2019 issued from the office of District
Land Acquisition Officer, Jehanabad whereby and whereunder
the petitioner has been directed to receive compensation of the
land appertaining to Khata No. 108, 306, Khesra No. 1231, 1241
total measuring 7 ½ dec. situated in Mjauza- Ner within
Patna High Court CWJC No.5604 of 2020 dt.22-11-2021
Makhdumpur P.S. Case under the District of Jehanabad acquired
for the purpose of construction of 4/6 lane Road under N.H. 83,
Patna Gaya Dobhi Section and the rate of compensation has
approved by National Highway Authority, India and after 3G
Estimate and determined by the competent authority the District
land Acquisition Officer Jehanabad; and further the petitioner
has been directed that no claim of compensation shall be
entertained in case there is change of nature of the
land/structure with a further direction to the petitioner that no
obstruction shall be caused after receipt of the payment.
(ii) To quash the letter dated 63/DLA dated 04.02.2020 issued
from the office of District Land Acquisition Officer, Jehanabad
whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been directed to
receive compensation in lieu of acquisition of land for alignment
under the N.H. 83 Project failing which construction made in the
land of Khata No. 0108, 306, Khesra No. 1231, 1241 measuring
7 ½ dec. shall be removed with the help of police force and
compensation amount shall be deposited in the court.
(iii) To direct the respondents to make the payment of
compensation to the petitioner for acquisition of the land
appertaining to Khata No. 108, 306 Khesra No. 1231, 1241
measuring 7 ½ dec. situated in Mauza- Ner, P.S. Makhdumpur,
District- Jehanabad acquired under section 3 (1)A of the
National Highways Act, 1956.
(iv) To direct the respondents to make the payment of
compensation of aforesaid land to the petitioner taking into the
consideration of land being residential in nature as per the
current market rate/New Act 2013 prevailing in the area along
with interest on account of delay and latches on the part of the
respondents.
(v) To any other reliefs to which the petitioner may be found
entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case."
Patna High Court CWJC No.5604 of 2020 dt.22-11-2021
3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the respondent
NHAI appears and raises a preliminary objection to the effect that an
alternative remedy is available to the petitioner with regard to
insufficiency of the compensation amount as determined, by way of
arbitration in terms of Section 3G (5) of the National Highways Act,
1956.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the
above proposition.
5. In the above view of the matter, this Court is not inclined
to interfere in the matter in its extra-ordinary writ jurisdiction.
6. The writ application stands dismissed.
7. Needless to say, the petitioner shall be at liberty to seek
remedy before the appropriate forum as may be available to him in
accordance with law.
8. It is made clear that if the petitioner approaches the
appropriate forum, the concerned authority/forum would have regard
to the present proceeding being pursued by the petitioner, while
considering any issue relating to condonation of delay, if applicable.
(Vikash Jain, J)
Ibrar//-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N.A.
Uploading Date 25.11.2021
Transmission Date N.A.
