Ramchandra Prasad And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6016 of 2017 ====================================================== 1.
Ramchandra Prasad Son of Late Khublal Sah, 2.
Anand Sah, Son of Late Khublal Sah, 3.
Bindeshwar Sah, Son of Anand Sah, 4.
Rajendra Sah, Son of Late Bikhari Sah, 5.
Ismail Miyan, Son of Lochan Miyan, 6.
Wali Mohammad, Son of Jalil Miyan, 7.
Jakir, Son of Jalil Miyan, 8.
Lakshmi Devi, Wife of Janak Das, 9.
Ram Rekha Sah, Son of Late Diplal Sah, All resident of village - Bhanaspatti, P.S. Runni Saidpur, District - Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State Of Bihar 2.
The Project Director, National Highway Authority of India 3.
The Collector, Sitamarhi 4.
The Additional Collector, Sitamarhi 5.
The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Sitamarhi 6.
The Sub - Divisional Officer, Sadar, Sitamarhi 7.
The District Sub - Registrar, Sitamarhi 8.
The Circle Officer, Runni Saidpur, Sitamarhi ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ranjeet Sandiyal, Advocate For the State :
Mrs. Nutan Sahay, AC to AAG-12 For the NHAI :
Dr. Maurya Vijay Chandra, Advocate Mr. Gaurav Govinda, Advocate Ms. Ankita Kumari, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 02-09-2025 Heard Ranjeet Sandiyal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Nutal Sahay, learned AC to AAG-12 as also Ms. Ankita Kumari representing the NHAI.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
Patna High Court CWJC No.6016 of 2017(3) dt.02-09-2025 2/3 following relief/s:
(i) to direct the respondent authorities for making payment of the compensation to the petitioners against their lands acquired by the Central Government, which fall within the stretch of N.H.-77 (MuzaffarpurSitamarhi-Sonbarsa) in terms of Resolution contained in Memo No.747 dated 13.05.2008 i.e. Bihar Land Acquisition Reestablishment and Re-habilitation Policy, 2007;
(ii) to direct the respondents to make payment of compensation amount to the petitioners at the rate of Rs.70000/-per decimal against their acquired land for the purpose of N.H.77 in the State of Bihar;
(iii) to grant any other relief(s), which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
3. The matter relates to the National Highway -77 development (Muzaffarpur-Sitamarhi-Sonbarsa) stretch and the petitioner is aggrieved by the compensation amount.
Patna High Court CWJC No.6016 of 2017(3) dt.02-09-2025 3/3
4. Learned State counsel at the outset submits that if aggrieved, the petitioner should have moved before the Arbitrator under section 3(G)(5) of the National Highway Act, 1956.
5. In that background, learned counsel for the petitioner prays and is allowed to approach the Arbitrator cum Divisional Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur/appropriate authority in next eight weeks.
6. If such petition is preferred, it has to be taken to its logical conclusion.
7. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation.
(Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U