Subhash Prasad Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12040 of 2017 ====================================================== Subhash Prasad Singh Son of Late Yugal Kishore Singh, Resident of VillageDafarpur, P.S.- Barahat, District- Banka. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

District Magistrate cum Collector, Bhagalpur. 3.

District Magistrate cum Collector, Banka.

4.

District Land Acquisition Officer, Bhagalpur. 5.

District Land Acquisition Officer, Banka.

6.

Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Bounsi, Banka. 7.

Circle Officer, Barahat, Banka.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajiv Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, GP-14 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 28-04-2025 Heard Mr. Rajiv Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, GP-14.

2. The present writ petition has been preferred for the following relief(s):

"(i) A writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, direction commanding the respondents to act in accordance with law and further to direct the respondents to make payment of compensation amount with interest for the admitted portion of land acquired in Khata No. 290 (Old), 1556 (New) Khesra No. 373

Patna High Court CWJC No.12040 of 2017(2) dt.28-04-2025 2/2 (Old) and 358 (Old), 640 (New) Rakwa 1.78 Acres for the construction of Chandan Canal Auria no. 385 and the said Canal has been constructed.

(ii) Any other relief to which the petitioner is found entitled to."

3. At the outset, learned State counsel objected to the fact that a proceeding that came to an end in the year 1964-65 against the grandmother of the petitioner, he is now agitating the matter and even the details whether he is the sole heir or not, is/are not on record.

4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he shall be approaching the appropriate forum for the redressal of the grievance.

5. The delay is there, the facts are not on record, it is for the petitioner to decide his future course of action.

6. The writ petition stands disposed of.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Adnan/- U