[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Patna High Court
Kashinath Mishra vs The State Of Bihar on 26 February, 2026
Author: Harish Kumar
Bench: Harish Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.111 of 2025
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19752 of 2024
======================================================
Kashinath Mishra s/o Dharmnath mishra Resident of Village- Takipur, Police
Station- Maharajganj, District- Siwan (Bihar).
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land
Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Divisional Commissioner, Saran, Chapra.
3. The Competent Authority-Cum-District Land Acquisition Officer, Siwan.
4. The District Magistrate-Cum-Collector, Siwan.
5. The Additional Collector, Siwan.
6. The Circle Officer, Maharajganj, Siwan.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Waliur Rahman, Advocate
Mr.Ranjeet Choubey, Advocate
Mr. Kumar Gaurav Singh, Advocate
Mr. Abhijit Gautam, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Dwivedi, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 26-02-2026
This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by the
appellant-Kashinath Mishra challenging the order dated
23.01.2025
passed by the learned Single Judge in CWJC No.
19752 of 2024.
2. The aforesaid writ petition was filed seeking for the
following relief(s):-
Patna High Court L.P.A No.111 of 2025 dt.26-02-2026
"(i) a direction For issuance of writ/s,
order/s, direction/s in the nature of mandamus,
commanding the respondent to issue to immediately
make payment against the acquired of land of the
petitioner situated under Mauza-Sarangpur, Thana No.
537, Khata No. 516, 217, Khesra No. 291, 290, 288,
289, 295, 296, 297, 299, 300 acquired under the
construction of the Project namely Ramjanki Path.
ii. For further issuance of writ/s, order/s,
direction/s to pay the entire amount of compensation
along with penal interest @24% per annum."
3. It is the case of the appellant that his land was
acquired for the construction of Ram Janki Path, pertaining to
Mauza-Sarangpur, Thana No. 537, Khata Nos. 516 and 217, and
Khesra Nos. 291, 290, 288, 289, 295, 296, 297, 299, and 300.
The said land was the ancestral property of the petitioner-
appellant, and upon partition of the joint family property, it fell
to the petitioner's share. The petitioner is in cultivating
possession of the land for the last 40 years. It is the further case
of the appellant that the land was acquired for the four-lane
scheme of Ram Janki Path as NH-227A (Siwan-Masrakh). For
the said widening and extension of the road, the land was
acquired by the Authority in Land Acquisition Case No. 13 of
2021-22, and thereafter an award was prepared. The entire land
originally belonged to one Chandradev Mishra, who was the
maternal forefather of the appellant. Upon learning that his co-
sharers were attempting to obtain the compensation in their
Patna High Court L.P.A No.111 of 2025 dt.26-02-2026
favour, the appellant filed his objection and submitted all
relevant documents before the Land Acquisition Officer, Siwan,
asserting his ownership over the land.
4. The application was submitted on 11.03.2022, which
has been annexed to the writ petition as Annexure-1 and
thereafter another application was submitted to the District
Magistrate, Siwan for making payment of the compensation
which has been annexed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition. It is
further case of the appellant that on the application of the
appellant, the District Land Acquisition Officer, Siwan issued
Memo No. 1011 dated 07.08.2024 to the Circle Officer,
Maharajganj and called for a detailed report regarding claim of
the petitioner along with the opinion of the Circle Officer
regarding payment of compensation to the appellant and the
Circle Officer, Maharajganj submitted a detailed report, in
which he has opined that the appellant is entitled to get the
payment of compensation as he has share in the land and there is
no dispute pending over the land. The said report of the Circle
Officer, Mahagajganj has been annexed to the writ petition as
Annexure-4. It is the case of the appellant that, although he has
approached the Office of the District Land Acquisition Officer,
Siwan, on several occassions with a request for payment of
Patna High Court L.P.A No.111 of 2025 dt.26-02-2026
compensation in respect of the land acquired by the Authority,
no action has been taken in this regard.
5. When the matter was taken up on 23.01.2025, before
the learned Single Judge, a submission was made by learned
counsel for the State, with reference to Annexure-4 to the writ
petition, that the land stood recorded in the name of the
petitioner's maternal grandfather and that the sons of the
maternal grandfather were in possession of the land. It was
further submitted that there was no dispute with respect to the
land and that the enquiry report of the Circle Officer,
Maharajganj did not even remotely suggest that the land
belonged to the petitioner.
6. On the basis of such submission and after perusing
the enquiry report of the Circle Officer, Maharajganj, the
learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the
Circle Officer, Maharajganj conducted a comprehensive enquiry
into the matter and submitted a detailed report dated 09.09.2024
which confirmed the appellant's rightful claim to compensation
and the report further clarified that the objection raised during
the acquisition process was baseless and it was resolved in
favour of the appellant. Learned counsel further argued that in
Patna High Court L.P.A No.111 of 2025 dt.26-02-2026
view of specific provision available in the Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation & Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to
as the 'Act, 2013' ), if there is a dispute as to the apportionment,
the Collector is required to refer such dispute to the Authority
which has been defined under the 'Act, 2013' and since the
Authority has not taken any steps, the appellant was constrained
to approach this Court by filing the writ petition, however, the
writ petition was dismissed without any cogent reason and since
there is perversity in the order, the L.P.A may be entertained and
the impugned order be set aside.
8. Section 76 of the 'Act, 2013', which relates to
dispute as to the apportionment states that 'when the amount of
compensation has been settled, if any dispute arises as to the
apportionment of the same or any part thereof, or as to the
persons to whom the same or any part thereof is payable, the
Collector may refer such disputes to the Authority'.
'Authority' has been defined under Section 3(f) of
'Act, 2013' which means Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation
and Resettlement Authority established under section 51 of the
said Act.
Section 51 of 'Act, 2013' states that the appropriate
Patna High Court L.P.A No.111 of 2025 dt.26-02-2026
Government, for the purpose of providing speedy disposal of
disputes relating to land acquisition, compensation,
rehabilitation and resettlement, establish, by notification, one or
more Authorities to be known as the "Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority" in exercise of
jurisdiction, powers and authority conferred on it by or under
this Act, and the appropriate government shall also specify in
the notification referred to in sub-section (1) the areas within
which the Authority may exercise the jurisdiction for
entertaining and deciding the references made to it under section
64 and applications made by the applicant under second proviso
to sub-section (1) of section 64.
Section 63 of 'Act, 2013', bars the jurisdiction of
the Civil Court to entertain any dispute relating to land
acquisition in respect of which the Collector or the Authority is
empowered by or under the 'Act, 2013' and it further stipulates
that no injunction shall be granted by any court in respect of any
such matter.
9. Taking note of the aforenoted statutory provisions,
we are of the view that the submission advanced by the learned
counsel for the appellant that the Collector ought to have
referred the dispute to the Authority has got substantial force
Patna High Court L.P.A No.111 of 2025 dt.26-02-2026
and the appellant's prayer should not have been rejected by the
learned Single Judge for referring the matter to the Authority.
10. After hearing the learned counsel for both the
parties and having found perversity in the order of the learned
Single Judge dated 23.01.2025 passed in CWJC No. 19752 of
2024, we set aside the said order.
11. The respondent no. 4-District Magistrate-cum-
Collector, Siwan shall act upon the certified copy of this order
produced before him and shall now refer the dispute to the
Competent Authority. The Authority concerned shall thereafter
take a decision expeditiously in accordance with law.
It is made clear that we have expressed no opinion
on the merits of the claim of the appellant regarding his
entitlement to get compensation.
Accordingly the LPA stands disposed of.
(Sangam Kumar Sahoo, CJ)
(Harish Kumar, J)
Ranjan/.-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 27.02.2026
Transmission Date NA
