Ram Beyash Paneri v. The Union Of India And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9535 of 2016 ====================================================== Ram Beyash Paneri Son of Late Ram Ken Paneri, Resident of villageMubarakpur, P.S. Mohaniya, District- Kaimur Bhabhua. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The Union Of India 2.
The Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways Govt of India, New Delhi.
3.
The National Highway Authority of India through its Chairman-CumSecretary, Ministry of Shipping R 4.
The Project Director, National Highway Authority, D.I.G.Colony Maqbul Alam Road, Varanashi U.P.
5.
The District Land Acquisition Officer-Cum- Competent Authority, Bhabhua 6.
The Additional Collector-cum- Arbitrator, Bhabhua. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
None For the State :
Smt. Binita Singh, SC-28 For the NHAI :
Dr. Maurya Vijay Chandra, Advocate :
Mr. Gaurav Govinda, Advocate :
Ms. Preety Ranjan, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 08-09-2025 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner though the State as also the National Highway Authority of India are present.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the grant of following relief(s):
"for issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction/(s) to the respondent authorities for setting aside the Order dated 23.05.2015 passed by Arbitrator, Bhabhua in Case No. 241/2014-15, whereby and where
Patna High Court CWJC No.9535 of 2016(2) dt.08-09-2025 2/2 under the petitioner has been arbitrarily deprived from the adequate compensation of land acquired by Central Government under National Highway Authority Act 1950 contrary to their own finding and arbitrarily discretion in evaluating the land valuation which is primafacie evident from their order, which renders the instant order liable to be vitiated.
And/Or pass such order/s which the Hon'ble court thinks the petitioner is entitled for."
3. Learned counsels jointly submits that the Arbitrator-cum-Additional Collector, Kaimur at Bhabhua has already passed an order and the petitioner has to move before the competent Civil Court under section 34 of the Arbitration and Reconciliation Act, 1996.
4. Be that as it may, since there is no appearance, the writ petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution. (Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U