Suman Kumar Mishra v. The Union Of India And ORS.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5832 of 2015 ====================================================== 1.
Suman Kumar Mishra 2.
Sunil Kumar Mishra, Both are Sons of Late Kedar Nath Mishra, Resident of Village- Khopa, P.O.- Sudairtauli, P.S.- Phulparas, District- Madhubani, Bihar-847402.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The Union Of India and Ors.
2.
The Chairman, National Highway Authority of India, Sector-10/11 Dwarka, New Delhi.
3.
The Project Director, National Highway Authority of India, H/o- Sri S.N. Mishra, Ward No.10, Prfess 4.
The District Magistrate, Madhubani.
5.
The Additional Collector, Madhubani.
6.
The District Land Acquisition Officer, District- Madhubani. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Lakshmindra Kumar Yadav, Adv.
For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Sourav, GA-5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 08-07-2025 Heard Mr. Lakshmindra Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sourav Kumar, learned AC to GA-5.
2. The present writ petition has been preferred for the following relief(s):
(i) For a MANDAMUS commanding the respondents to make payment for the acquired house vide L.A.
No.120, Khesra No. 210, Area-House, for which the settled compensation amount is
Patna High Court CWJC No.5832 of 2015(3) dt.08-07-2025 2/3 Rs.612555/- (Six lakhs twelve thousand five hundred fifty five only) for widening strengthening of National Highway 57 and the work has been completed at the concerned place but till date compensation amount of the house has not been paid to petitioner, for which the petitioners are entitled for compensation amount of house alongwith interest from due date till the date of payment.
(ii) For any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioners may found entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though payment relating to the land has been made, the building structure that was existing there, the same has not been compensated.
4. Though the State has not filed any affidavit despite the direction of the Co-ordinate Bench in the year 2017, learned State Counsel has taken this Court to Annexure-2 to show that he has been granted payment for the building too.
5. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that they may be given liberty to approach the Competent Authority/Court for the redressal of the grievance.
6. The said liberty is always there if the petitioners are aggrieved by the compensation amount.
Patna High Court CWJC No.5832 of 2015(3) dt.08-07-2025 3/3
7. Granting liberty and without commenting on the merit of the case, the writ petition is disposed of.
8. Pending I.A.(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U