Suresh Prasad v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8658 of 2026 ====================================================== 1.
Suresh Prasad, Son of Late Makhan Saw, Resident of Village- Hilsa Bihari Road, P.S.- Hilsa, District- Nalanda.
2.
Prahlad Thakur, Son of Yadunandan Thakur, Resident of Village- Hilsa Bihari Road, P.S.- Hilsa, District- Nalanda.
3.
Bablu Pandit @ Dinesh Kumar, Son of Late Suresh Pandit, Resident of Village- Hilsa Bihari Road, P.S.- Hilsa, District- Nalanda. 4.
Jai Prakash Narayan Santosh, Son of Late Jawahar Lal Santosh, Resident of Village- Hilsa Bihari Road, P.S.- Hilsa, District- Nalanda. 5.
Dharmendra Kumar, Son of Krishna Prasad, Resident of Village- Hilsa Bihari Road, P.S.- Hilsa, District- Nalanda.
6.
Kumar Gaurav, Son of Late Birendra Prasad, Resident of Village- Hilsa Bihari Road, P.S.- Hilsa, District- Nalanda.
7.
Radhe Saw, Son of Late Ram Chandra Saw, Resident of Village- Hilsa Bihari Road, P.S.- Hilsa, District- Nalanda.
8.
Uday Pandit, Son of Nandu Pandit, Resident of Village- Hilsa Bihari Road, P.S.- Hilsa, District- Nalanda.
9.
Smt. Hemlata Devi, Wife of Dinesh Kumar @ Bablu Pandit, Resident of Village- Hilsa Bihari Road, P.S.- Hilsa, District- Nalanda. 10.
Yogendra Mahto, Son of Late Keshwar Mahto, Resident of Village- Hilsa Bihari Road, P.S.- Hilsa, District- Nalanda.
11.
Dayanand Pandit, Son of Late Dahu Pandit, Resident of Village- Hilsa Bihari Road, P.S.- Hilsa, District- Nalanda.
12.
Manohar Vishwakarma, Son of Saryug Vishwakarma, Resident of VillageHilsa Bihari Road, P.S.- Hilsa, District- Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar.
2.
The Additional Chief Secretary, Urban Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3.
The Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2/4 4.
The District Magistrate, Bihar Sharif, Nalanda. 5.
The Land Acquisition Officer, Bihar Sharif, Nalanda. 6.
The Sub-Divisional Officer, Hilsa, District- Nalanda. 7.
The Superintending Engineer, Road Construction Department, Road Circle, Hilsa, District- Nalanda.
8.
The Executive Engineer, Road Construction Department, Road Division, Hilsa, District- Nalanda.
9.
The Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Hilsa, District- Nalanda. 10.
The Circle Officer, Hilsa, District- Nalanda. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Kripa Nand Jha, Adv.
For the State :
Mr. R.P.N. Tiwari, AC to SC-25 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RANA VIKRAM SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 29-06-2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.
2. At the very outset, the learned counsel for the petitioners fairly submits that the petitioners have approached this Court on account of strong apprehension based on the information provided vide Letter No. 194 dated 19.02.2026 issued by the Public Information Officer, Road Construction Department, Road Division, Hilsa that the land detailed therein the enclosure are likely to be acquired for expansion of HilsaNoorsarai Road. The details of the petitioners' land is also
3/4 there in the list of the persons whose land(s) could be acquired for the aforesaid purpose for widening of the road in connection with Khesra No. 567 as enclosed with the aforesaid letter dated 19.02.2026.
3. However, till date, no notice for acquisition of the aforesaid land has been given to the petitioners.
4. At this stage, the learned counsel for the State submits that the process of actual acquisition of land is yet to begin.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, submits that whenever the process of actual acquisition of the land begins, the petitioners may be given an opportunity to be heard so that they could produce all relevant documents with respect to the land upon which the dwelling house has been there, seeking proper alternative allotment of land nearby, so that the petitioners and their family members could not be rendered land-less with no dwelling house thereon.
6. The learned counsel for the State has no objection to the same rather he fairly submits that the moment the actual acquisition begins, all the land-holders would be given notice and a proper opportunity of hearing be aforded to them.
4/4
7. In the above circumstances, the present writ application appears to be pre-mature. The petitioners are at liberty to approach this Court as soon as they are denied any opportunity of proper hearing by the authorities acquiring the land upon which the petitioners' dwelling house has been constructed.
8. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition stands disposed off.
9. Interlocutory application(s), if any, also stands disposed off.
(Rana Vikram Singh, J) Praveen-II/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 30.06.2026 Transmission Date N/A