SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 4078

PATNA HIGH COURT
HONOURABLE MR. RAJIV ROY, J
Jairam Rajak, Mina Devi, Munni Devi, Meera Kumari – Appellant
Versus
The Union Of India – Respondent
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19441 of 2018



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Sanjay Kumar Verma, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. Sajid Salim Khan- Sc25, Dr. Maurya Vijay Chandra, Adv., Mr. Gaurav Govinda, Adv.

Fair compensation is essential before land acquisition under the National Highway Act.

Headnote:The Court addressed the petitioner's claim to restrain land acquisition without compensation under the National Highway Act. It found the necessity of ensuring fair compensation before any acquisition could be considered. The petitioner’s right to possession was recognized, and procedural safeguards were underscored. The primary issue framed was regarding entitlement to compensation before such actions. The court reasoned that the due process is essential in land acquisition cases. The final outcome ordered the return of the rule within one year.

Table of Content
1. petitioner challenges land acquisition. (Para 2)
2. various reliefs sought against respondents. (Para 3)
3. no notice required for state officials. (Para 4)

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

5 01-12-2025 Heard the parties.

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

for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction for restraining the respondents from acquiring the petitioner's land undfer the provisions of the National Highway Act and interfering with the right, title and possession of the petitioner over the land appertaining to Khata No. 104, plot no. 719 measuring 1 Katha situated in Mauza Nathupur, P.S.- Phulwarisharif, (now P.S.- Parsa Bazar), District- Patna without for making payment of the compensation amount and so for commanding the respondents to make the admissible compensation amount to the petitioner before proceeding to acquire the land of the petitioner under the provision of National Highway Act as in connection with Land Acquisition Case No. 46/2013-14 taken up purporting to acquire the land for the purpose of construction of N.H. 83 (Patna-Gaya Dobhi Section) inter alia for the following:

Reliefs:-

i) Respondents be restrained from doing any act in purporting to make acquisition of the aforesaid land of the petitioner by demarcating the same with a view to declare their (respondent/s) possession over the said land contrary to the present status of possession as rest in the hand of the petitioner.

ii) The respondents be restrained from interfering with the right, title, interest and possession of the petitioner over the said piece of land without payment of compensation.

iii) The respondent be commanded to act impartially in making acquisition of the land as done in the case of other similarly situated raiyat like the petitioner.

iv) The impugned act of the respondent in acquiring the land of the petitioner without making payment of any farthing in lieu of the compensation admissible under the relevant provision of the Act.

v) The respondent be commanded to follow due procedure as for making the acquisition of the land under the provision of N.H. Act, 1956 inter- alia saying for payment of the compensation before the actual acquisition of the land.

vi) The respondent District Land Acquisition Officer be directed to make payment of the compensation amount to the petitioner as paid to the other similarly situated raiyat like the petitioner whose lands are the subject matter of acquisition and acquired by the authority after making payment of the compensation as sanctioned by law.

vii) The respondents be directed to grant all the consequential benefits to the petitioner for which she is legally entitled to.

viii) Any other relief or reliefs be granted to the petitioner for which she is legally entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. This application shall be heard.

4. Since all the respondents are State/Union Officials, no notice is required.

5. Pleadings to be exchanged in six months.

6. Rule is made returnable within a period of one year.

(Rajiv Roy, J)

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top