Satyadeo Prasad Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4253 of 2024 ====================================================== 1.

Satyadeo Prasad Singh son of Sri Sita Ram Mandal, resident of MauzaSripurgahar, Tole-Bathnaha, P.S.-Khanpur, District-Samastipur. 2.

Satyendra Prasad, Son of Sri Sita Ram Mandal, resident of MauzaSripurgahar, Tole-Bathnaha, P.S.-Khanpur, District-Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Secretary, Revenue Department, Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna.

2.

The District Magistrate, Samastipur.

3.

The Land Acquisition Officer, Samastipur.

4.

The Project Director of National Highway Authority of India (DarbhangaRosera), Four Lane Division, Jainagar. 5.

The Executive Engineer, National Highway Division-Jay Nagar. 6.

The Additional District Magistrate, Record Room, Samastipur. 7.

The Land Reform Deputy Collector, Samastipur. 8.

The Circle Officer, Khanpur, Samastipur.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Amit Srivastava, Sr. Advocate Mr.Vijay Anand, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Government Pleader 11 For the NHAI :

Mr. Maurya Vijay Chandra, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 25-06-2024 Heard Mr. Amit Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel duly assisted by Mr. Vijay Anand, learned Advocate for the petitioners, Mr. Maurya Vijay chandra, learned counsel for the NHAI and learned G.P. -11 for the State.

2. The present petition has been preferred for: issuance of nature of mandamus commanding the Respondents to consider the claim of compensation of Plot No. 13342 and 13158 of

2/4 Mauza-Sripurgahar, Khanpur, Samastipur acquired by the N.H.A.I belonging to the petitioners in view of the judgment dated 29.3.2017 passed by Learned Sub-Judge 1st Samastipur in Title Suit No.290/2016 as well as order dated 22.05.2009 passed by Assistant Settlement Officer, Samastipur in two cases i.e. 283/2006 and 287/2006 by which direction has been given to make necessary correction in the Khatiyan which has wrongly been entered as Anawad Servsadharan and Anawad Bihar Sarkar.

3. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioners straightway took this Court to the order passed by the learned Sub-Judge-Ist, Samastipur in Title Suit No. 290/2016 (Satyadev Prasad Singh & Ors vs. The State of Bihar & Ors) in which the title with regard to the land in question was decided in his favour (Annexure-4 to the petition). The details of the land quoted herein below:- Khate old Khata New Khesra old Khesra New Area 13342 0-8 South 13158 0-32 North 13946 0-1 East 11715 0-9

4. He submits that thereafter, he petitioned before all

3/4 the concerned respondents including the respondent no. 7 (The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Samastipur) on 27.01.2024 and in view of the fact nothing happened. Hence, the present writ petition.

5. With the help of paragraph no. 18 of the petition, he submits that to his knowledge, till date, the judgment dated 29.03.2017 in Title Suit No. 290 of 2016 passed by the SubJudge-Ist, Samastipur has not been challenged before the any competent Court.

6. Learned State counsel submits that if the contention of the petitioner is true inasmuch as the title Court has decided the matter in his favour and no appeal has been preferred against that order, the respondents are duty bound to pass an appropriate order on the petition put forward by the petitioner. He submits that though letter has been sent, no reply was forthcoming.

7. Despite the submission of two copies of the writ petition to the State counsel six months ago and despite the contention of the State that the letter was issued vide letter no. 4638 dated 15.02.2024, the respondent did not submit any statement of facts which resulted into non-filing of the counter affidavit.

8. Instead of imposing cost upon the respondents

4/4 and/or keeping the case pending, it would be appropriate that the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent no. 3 (the District Land Acquisition Officer, Samastipur) to take a decision on the fresh petition to be filed by the petitioner along with all the relevant documents within a period of four weeks from today, within next four months.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Jagdish/- U