Ram Kumar Singh @ Ram Kumar Sinha v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.23981 of 2018 ====================================================== Ram Kumar Singh @ Ram Kumar Sinha Son of Late Seodani Singh, VillDakhingaon, P.O.- Wazirganj, District-Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Collector, Gaya District, Gaya.

3.

The Arbitrator-cum-Additional Collector, Gaya. 4.

The Compertent Authority under N.H. 82 cum District Land Acquisition Officer, Gaya.

5.

National Highway Authority of Gaya for National Highway 82, Gaya, ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Manoj Kumar Sinha, SC-19 For NHAI :

Dr. Maurya Vijay Gaurav Govinda, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 11-11-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The present petition has been preferred for the following relief/s:

(i) for issuance of a writ, order or direction including a writ in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the respondents to pay the enhance award amount @ commercial land rate for my acquire land plot no. 187, 190 and 175 of village: Dakhingaon, Wazirganj, Gaya as the land situated at market of Wasirganj hence it is of commercial in the nature;

(ii) and also for issuance of a writ in the

Patna High Court CWJC No.23981 of 2018(2) dt.11-11-2025 2/2 nature of Certiorari for quashing both the orders dated 04.08.18 passed by the respondent no. 3 in Case No. R.A.194/201718 and Case No. RA 193/2017-18 or be pleased to pass such other order/s as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper.

3. No one appears on behalf of the petitioner though the State is present.

4. Learned counsel representing the respondents has taken this Court to Annexure-09 and 10 to show that the land of the petitioner has been found to be agriculture in nature and accordingly passed an order dated 04.08.2018 clearly shows that if the petitioner is aggrieved, can move before a competent Court.

5. Instead of taking the route of the competent Court, the writ jurisdiction stands invoked.

6. However, since there is no appearance, the writ petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution. (Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U