Pawan Kumar Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2976 of 2026 ====================================================== 1.

Pawan Kumar Sharma Son of Late Rameshwar Prasad Singh, Resident of Village Darweshpura, P.O. Badi, P.S. Katrisarai, District - Nalanda. 2.

Jayant Kumar, Son of Ramanuj Praveen, Resident of Village Darweshpura, P.O. Badi, P.S. Katrisarai, District - Nalanda. 3.

Pradeep Kumar, Son of Ramlakhan Prasad Sharma, Resident of Village Lohan, P.O. Lohan, P.S. Sheikhpura, District - Sheikhpura. 4.

Aditya Kumar, Son of Anadi Shankar Sharma, Resident of House No. 424/F, 2nd Floor, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar, Pakhowal Road, Basant Avenue, District Ludhiyana, Punjab.

5.

Rakesh Kumar, Son of Sadananda Singh, Resident of Village - Darweshpura, P.O. Badi, P.S. - Katrisarai, District - Nalanda. 6.

Shambhu Sharan Sharma, Son of Arjun Singh, Resident of Village Saidi, P.O. Badi, P.S. Katrisarai, District - Nalanda. 7.

Arvind Kumar, Son of Vrijnandan Singh, Resident of Village Darweshpura, P.O. Badi, P.S. Katrisarai, District - Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4.

The District Magistrate Nalanda At Biharsharif, District-Nalanda. 5.

The Additional Collector, Land Reforms, Nalanda At Biharsharif, DistrictNalanda. 6.

The Deputy Collector, Nalanda at Biharsharif, District-Nalanda. 7.

The District Land Acquisition Officer, Nalanda At Biharsharif, DistrictNalanda. 8.

The Circle Officer (C.O.), KatriSarai, District-Nalanda. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mayank Rukhaiyar, Advocate :

Mr. Himanshu Kumar Akela, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Standing Counsel (8) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 10-03-2026 Heard Mr. Mayank Rukhaiyar, learned counsel for

2/6 the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

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

"(i) for issuance of an appropriate Writ (s) / Order (s), preferably a Writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, commanding the respondents to redetermine the market value of the Land of the Petitioners acquired by the Respondents in L.A. Case No. 28/2019-20 for expansion of Pawapuri Vilari (Ghosrawan Chachu Bigah) under village Darweshpura, Circle Katrisarai, P.S. Katrisarai, Thana No. 308, District - Nalanda;

(ii) for a Direction upon the respondents to recalculate the amount of compensation upon such redetermination of the market value of the land of the Petitioners acquired by the Respondents;

(iii) for issuance of an appropriate Writ (s) / Order (s), preferably a Writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, commanding the respondents to forthwith pay the difference of compensation to the Petitioners;

3/6 (iv) for any other reliefs for which the Petitioners are found entitled to."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that it will suffice if the order is passed in line with the CWJC No. 14048 of 2017 (Kanti Devi and Anr. vs. The State of Bihar and Ors.), disposed of on 14.07.2025 (Annexure P/7 to the petition).

4. The prayer and order in the Kanti Devi (supra) read as follows:

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

A. for issuance of an appropriate writ order or direction commanding the respondents to pay the compensation amount to the petitioners at an enhanced rate as per claim in representation dated 06-06-2013, petition dated 25-08-2014 as well as 20-03-2015 for the land of the petitioners which has been acquired under emergent process while notification dated 06-12-2013 and declaration dated 09-12-2013 published in District Gazettes bearing P.R No- 104/2013-14 for construction of Pawapuri-Ghosrawan Road,

4/6 Situated in village-Ghosrawan, Thana No-309 -Anchal Giriyak, DistrictNalanda.

B. for issuance of an appropriate writ order or direction commanding the respondents to dispose of the representation dated 06-06-2013 as well as 20-03-2015 filed by the present petitioners along with others before the District Land Acquisition Officer Patna, DistrictPatna with a prayer to pay the remaining compensation amount and also to enhance the rate of the land of the petitioners.

C. for issuance of an appropriate writ order or direction commanding the respondents either to pay the compensation amount at an enhanced rate as per claim made in representation dated 06-06-2013, petition dated 25-08-2014 as well as 20-03-2015 to the petitioners for the land of the petitioners which has been acquired under emergent process or de notify the said notification by releasing the land of the petitioners by handing over the possession over the land which has been acquired.

D. for issuance of an

5/6 appropriate writ order or direction commanding the respondents to make reference of the Land Acquisition Case No-10 of 2014-2015 to concern Land Acquisition Judge for reevaluation of the land which has been initiated by the authorities on the petition filed by the present petitioners before the District Land Acquisition Officer Nalanda, District- Nalanda with a prayer to enhance the rate of the land of the petitioner.

E. For any other relief or reliefs for which petitioner is entitled in the opinion of this Hon'ble High Court.

3. The documents on record show that pursuant to the award prepared, payments have been made, though the case of the petitioners is/are that they accepted the amount after putting in their respective objection.

4. In that background, it is open to the petitioners to approach the Appropriate Authority/Tribunal/Court in accordance with law if they believe that the amount that was incorporated in the award was not justified/in accordance with

6/6 the entitlement which they had."

5. Learned State counsel has no objection to the disposal of the writ petition in line with the Kanti Devi (supra) case as recorded above.

6. In that background, the writ petition is disposed of, in line with the Kanti Devi (supra) case allowing the petitioners to approach the appropriate authority/court in accordance with law.

(Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U