Krishna Dev Sharma @ Krishan Dev Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5207 of 2026 ====================================================== Krishna Dev Sharma @ Krishan Dev Sharma Son of Late Nathuni Sharma, Resident of village- Dhundhua, P.O.- Khadha, Police Station- Khaira, District- Aurangabad.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Collector, Aurangabad.

3.

The District Land Acquisition Officer, Aurangabad. 4.

The Circle Officer, Nabinagar, Aurangabad.

5.

The Bhartiya Rail Bijalee Company Ltd., (A Joint Venture of NTPC Ltd. and Ministry of Railways) through Chief Executive Officer, Nabinagar Thermal Power Project, Khaira, Nabinagar, Aurangabad. 6.

The Chief Executive Officer, NTPC, Khaira Nabinagar, Aurangabad. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Abhishek, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Gyan Prakash Ojha, GA-7 For the Resp. No.5&6 :

Mr. Amaresh Kumar Sinha, Advocate :

Mr. Vaibhav Narayan, Advocate :

Ms. Deeksha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 15-06-2026 Heard Mr. Abhishek, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State counsel beside Amaresh Kumar Sinha, learned counsel representing the respondent nos. 5 and 6.

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

"(i) for directing the respondent authorities to pay the amount of compensation to the petitioner for his raiyati land recorded under

2/4 khata no.38, plot no.477 measuring an area 1.55 acres situated at Mauza-Dhundhua, DistrictAurangabad which has been acquired by the respondent authority for construction of Thermal Power Project of NTPC, Nabinagar, Aurangabad.

(ii) for directing the respondent authority to consider the application submitted by the petitioner on 28.1.2026 and further to take proper decision over the same by providing proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. (iii) to grant any other relief/reliefs for which the petitioner is legally entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case."

3. The matter relates to a piece of land details of which stands incorporated in the prayer portion and needs no repeatation.

4. The petitioner namely Krishna Dev Sharma @ Krishan Dev Sharma and his brother Surendra Sharma earlier moved before the Patna High Court in CWJC No. 19940 of 2019 with the prayer that though the acquisition has taken place, they have not been given their rightful due and in an illegal

3/4 manner, the Land Acquisition Officer, Aurangabad has passed an order dated 23.01.2019 in Title Verification Case No. 34 of 2016.

5. The coordinate Bench took up the matter on 10.10.2022 and quash the said order with a direction to the Collector, Aurangabad to pass a fresh order.

6. Accordingly, the petitioner moved before Collector, Aurangabad in the said Appeal No. 149 of 2022 (Krishna Dev Sharma vs. The State of Bihar) it was taken up on 28.05.2025 and the concerned respondent gave approval for title verification of the said land (Thana No.57, Khata No. 38, Plot No.477 and area 1 Acre 55 Decimal under Mauza-Dhundhua, DistrictAurangabad).

7. Pursuant thereto, on 19.11.2025, the Circle Officer, Nabinagar, Aurangabad also gave a certificate to this effect. The contention in the writ petition is that despite the Collector, Aurangabad passing the said order which has subsequently been taken further by the Circle Officer, Nabinagar, Aurangabad, the payments have eluded them.

8. Learned counsel representing the respondents jointly submits that there is no document to show that armed with the said papers, they approach the appropriate authority.

4/4

9. Learned counsel for the petitioner has taken this Court to the annexures to show that a representation has been made before the Collector, Aurangabad to this effect.

10. This Court has gone through facts of the case and is of the opinion that the petitioner after the order passed by the Collector, Aurangabad has not moved in the right direction. The application alongwith all the relevant documents must have been filed before the respondent authorities so that they can take a decision and make payment, the same is/are missing here.

11. In that background, the writ petition is disposed of allowing the petitioner to file their respective petitions before the respondent nos. 2 and 3 namely, the Collector, Aurangabad and the District Land Acquisition Officer, Aurangabad in next four weeks who shall be duty bound to look into the matter and decide the same in next three months.

12. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation.

(Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U