Yogendra Mahto v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17276 of 2017 ====================================================== Yogendra Mahto S/o Late Natthu Mahto, R/o Village- Araria Sangram, P.O.- Tulapatganj, P.S. and Anchal-Jhanjharpur, District-Madhubani Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

The District Magistrate, Madhubani 3.

The District Land Acquisition Officer, Madhubani 4.

The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jhanjharpur, District-Madhubani 5.

The Chairman National Highway Authority of India NHAt, New Delhi. 6.

The Project Director, National Highway Authority of India NHAI, Darbhanga.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Lakshmindra Kumar Yadav, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Raj Kishore Roy, GP-18 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 17-06-2025 Heard the parties.

2.The present petition has been preferred for the following relief/s:

(i) for issuance of an appropriate of order, directions or writ in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding the respondents to dispose of the representation dated 13.01.2016 filed by the petitioner before the learned District Land Acquisition Officer, Madhubani in pursuance of the order

Patna High Court CWJC No.17276 of 2017(2) dt.17-06-2025 2/3 passed by this Hon'ble Court in CWJC No. 19642/2013 dated 15.12.2015;

(ii) for any other reliefs or reliefs for which the petitioner may be found entitled in the be facts and circumstances of the case.

3. It is unfortunate that for disposal of a representation, the petitioner has to approach Patna High Court. The worst part is that the writ petition was filed in the year 2017, neither the counter affidavit is on record nor the learned State Counsel is able to inform whether the representation has been disposed of or not.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner is also unaware of the fate of the case.

5. In that background, the writ petition is disposed of assuming that the respondent no.3, the District Land Acquisition Officer, Madhubani must have disposed of the representation pursuant to issuance of memo no. 146 dated 22.02.2016 by the said respondent (Annexure-4 to the petition).

6. It is made clear that if the said representation has not been disposed of, the aforesaid respondent, the District Land Acquisition Officer, Madhubani shall be paying Rs.5000/- from

Patna High Court CWJC No.17276 of 2017(2) dt.17-06-2025 3/3 his own pocket to the petitioner and shall ensure that the same is disposed of in two weeks from the date, the order has been delivered.

7. Since the writ petition has been disposed of, this Court refrains from imposing any cost on the learned State Counsel despite the fact that no assistance was rendered nor any communication was made from the said Officer to ascertain whether the representation stands disposed of or not. (Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U