Pawan Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.806 of 2026 ====================================================== 1.

Pawan Kumar Singh S/o- Late Gauri Shankar Singh, Resident of VillageMurtiya, Post and P.S. and Anchal- Adapur, District- East Champaran, Motihari.

2.

Amit Kumar Singh, S/o Late Shambhu Nath Singh, Resident of VillageMurtiya, Post and P.S. and Anchal- Adapur, District- East Champaran, Motihari.

3.

Ginni Devi, W/o- Paswan Kumar Singh, Resident of Village- Murtiya, Post and P.S. and Anchal- Adapur, District- East Champaran, Motihari. 4.

Ranarandhir Kumar Singh, S/o- Late Rajnarayan Singh, Resident of VillageMurtiya, Post and P.S. and Anchal- Adapur, District- East Champaran, Motihari.

5.

Ajay Kumar Singh, S/o- Late Adeya Singh, Resident of Village- Murtiya, Post and P.S. and Anchal- Adapur, District- East Champaran, Motihari. 6.

Abhay Kumar Singh @ Abhay Singh, S/o- Late Adeya Singh, Resident of Village- Murtiya, Post and P.S. and Anchal- Adapur, District- East Champaran, Motihari.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The District Land Acquisition Officer, East Champaran, Motihari. 4.

The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, District- East Champaran, Motihari. 5.

The Circle Officer, Circle- Adapur, East Champaran. 6.

The Commandant, 47th BN SSB, Pantoka, Raxaul, East Champaran. 7.

The Commandant, 47th BN SSB, Piprakothi, East Champaran. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Adv.

Mr. Sumit Kumar Gupta, Adv.

Ms. Isha Mishra, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Addl. Advocate General (03) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 22-01-2026 Heard Ms. Isha Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2/4

2. The present application has been preferred for the following relief(s):

(i). For directing and commanding the respondent authorities for the payment of compensation for the land of the petitioners situated at Mauza-Murtiya (Paschimi Koraiya), Thana No. 98, Khata No. 113, Khesra No. 788, measuring 1 acre 86 decimals, which has been acquired in Land Acquisition Case No. 05/2017-18 under the provisions of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013, for establishment of Border Out Post (B.O.P.), West Koraiya, of the 45th Battalion, S.S.B., Motihari.

(ii). For further directing and commanding the respondent authorities to pay the compound interest on the due compensation amount till date of realisation of the said amount to the petitioners.

(iii). For further directing and commanding the respondent authorities for considering the application dt. 27.08. 2025, which has been filed by petitioners before the respondents authorities for the release of compensation amount in L.A. Case No.

05/2017-18.

(iv). For further give other appropriate relief/reliefs to which the petitioners found entitled in the facts and

3/4 circumstances of the present case.

3. The matter relates to Land Acquisition Case No. 5 of 2017-18 relating to establishment of Border Out Post for 45th Battalion SSB, Motihari.

4. The petitioners claim that their lands are also part of the said land acquisition process and in support thereof, learned counsel for the petitioner took this Court to the notices issued to some of the petitioners in the present case to remain present along with the supporting document so that appropriate steps is/are taken. The story stops at that point and the steps taken by the petitioners pursuant to the said notices are not on record.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that they preferred representation.

6. This Court is of the view that notices were very clear, the petitioners were to present themselves with supporting documents to claim the compensation for the land in question. Clearly, they failed to do so. However, learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the award has still not been prepared and as such, the petitioners have not missed the bus.

7. In that background, allowing the petitioners to individually approach the respondents with supporting documents pursuant to the notices issued to satisfy them

4/4 regarding the bona fide claim for the compensation of the land in question, the writ petition is disposed of.

8. Needless to add, if individual petitions by the petitioners are presented and if the award has not still been prepared, the same has to be looked into by the concerned respondent so that those who are claiming their genuine compensation are not left out.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U