IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17470 of 2021 ======================================================

1. Kushmi Devi, Widow of Late Gagar Singh, resident of Village-Matura Sultanpur Pachkathiya, P.S.-Bidupur, District-Vaishali.

2. Bharat Singh, Son of Late Gagar Singh, resident of Village-Matura Sultanpur Pachkathiya, P.S.-Bidupur, District-Vaishali.

3. Munakiya Devi, Wife of Deo Nandan Singh, resident of Village-Matura Sultanpur Pachkathiya, P.S.-Bidupur, District-Vaishali.

4. Mithilesh Singh, son of Late Jai Kisun Singh, resident of Village-Matura Sultanpur Pachkathiya, P.S.-Bidupur, District-Vaishali.

5. Rampreet Singh, son of Late Jai Kisun Singh, resident of Village-Matura Sultanpur Pachkathiya, P.S.-Bidupur, District-Vaishali.

6. Rajeshwar Singh, son of Late Jai Kisun Singh, resident of Village-Matura Sultanpur Pachkathiya, P.S.-Bidupur, District-Vaishali.

7. Suresh Singh, son of Late Jai Kisun Singh, resident of Village-Matura Sultanpur Pachkathiya, P.S.-Bidupur, District-Vaishali.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The District Magistrate Vaishali at Hajipur.

3. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Vaishali at Hajipur.

4. The Bihar State Road Construction Development Corporation thorugh its Managing Director, Patna.

5. The Managing Director, Bihar State Road Construction Development Corporation, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Abhinay Raj, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Md. Khurshid Alam ( Aag12 )

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER

6 16-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

2. Petitioners have inter alia prayed for following reliefs in the paragraphs No.1 of the writ petition:-

“That the present writ application is being filed to command the respondents for adequate payment of amount of compensation with respect to their land bearing plot No.2907 under Khata No.645 revenue Thana No.423, area 38.25 decimals, situated at Mathura Sultanpur Pachkathiya, Circle Bidupur, P.S. Bidupur, District Vaishali, which had been acquired under Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred as 2013 Act)

which came in effect from 01.01.2014.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that petitioners have been deprived from their rightful claim of due compensation for the land, which has been acquired for the purpose of for construction of a project, namely, Extradosed Cable Bridge Over River Ganga from Sabalpur NH 30 and Bidupur NH 103 and approach road. The petitioners are concerned for due payment of compensation in respect of his land appertaining to Plot No.2907, Khata No.645.

4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submitted that the petitioners himself are responsible for not receiving due compensation. Petitioners have not denied the fact that other persons in the vicinity have not been paid the due compensation. Petitioners have themselves delayed and have directly approached this Hon'ble Court. Accordingly, the writ petition is not maintainable.

5. Heard the parties.

6. It is commonly seen that the officers having quasi judicial power on their administrative side often delay in considering the representation filed by the aggrieved person or they deliberately delay to even adjudicate those cases where they exercise their adjudicatory power, while, it is well settled principle of law that High Courts should not exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India if an effective and efficacious remedy is available. Taking into the circumstances of the present case where fundamental/constitutional right of a citizen is infringed, this Court must not fail to exercise its power under Article 226 of the Constituti