Sunil Kumar Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3446 of 2023 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6826 of 2023 ====================================================== 1.1. Manju Devi W/o Late Sunil Kumar Chaudhary, resident of VillageMohanpur, P.S.-Manihari, District-Katihar. 1.2. Prem Kumar Chaudhary, son of Late Sunil Kumar Chaudhary, resident of Village-Mohanpur, P.S.-Manihari, District-Katihar. 1.3. Niraj Kumar Chaudhary, son of Late Sunil Kumar Chaudhary, resident of Village-Mohanpur, P.S.-Manihari, District-Katihar. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Mr. Ravi Prakash, the Collector Cum District Mgistrate, Katihar. 3.
Mr. Atul Anand, the District Land Acquisition Officer, Katihar. 4.
Mr. Arvind Kumar, the project Director, National Highway Authority P14, Purnea.
5.
Mr. Suraj Kumar, Project Manager, National Highway Authority P14, Purnea.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Bhola Prasad, Advocate For the NHAI :
Mr. Saket Tiwary, Advocate Mr. Animesh Gupta, Advocate Mr. Shivam Gupta, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Additional Advocate General 12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 04-12-2024 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioners, Learned Counsel for the State and Mr. Saket Tiwary, Learned Counsel for the N.H.A.I. with his client, namely, Mr. Kumar Saurabh, Project Director, N.H.A.I., Purnia and Mr. Ajmal Khurshid, DLAO, Katihar who appeared physically in person.
2. It transpires to this Court vide order dated 25.10.2024 in MJC. No.3446 of 2023 that the petitioners have
Patna High Court MJC No.3446 of 2023(11) dt.04-12-2024 2/2 not received a single penny, but today counsel for the petitioners submits that they have received the compensation amount, but reassessment amount has not been received by them. There is a clear cut observation that the petitioners shall move before arbitrator for the same because they have already received the amount, but at the time of argument in C.W.J.C. No.6826 of 2023, he has submitted that they have not received a single penny in this compensation. As such, there is no merit in the present MJC petition.
3. In this background, the present MJC application stands dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to go ahead in the light of the observation made in the writ petition. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) Prakashmani/- U T