IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15767 of 2022 ======================================================

Rakesh Narayan Singh Son of Late Kamal Deo Narayan Singh Resident of Village and P.O. and P.S.- Parbatta, District- Khagaria at present R/o 410, Pandey Mall Complex, Frazer Road, Patna- 800001.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Principal Secretary, Land and Revenue, Government of Bihar.

4. The Director, Land Acquisition Department Government of Bihar, Patna.

5. The Collector, Khagaria.

6. The Land Acquisition Officer, Khagaria.

7. The Circle Officer, Parbatta, Khagaria.

... ... Respondent/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rakesh Narayansingh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Vikash Kumar, (SC11)

Mr.Piyush Kumar Pandey, AC to SC 11 ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 19-02-2026 Heard Mr. Rakesh Narayansingh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Vikash Kumar, learned SC11 for the State.

2. The petitioner in paragraph no. 1 of the present writ petition has sought inter alia the following relief(s), which is reproduced hereinafter:-

“1. That this petition is being filed for issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, directing against the respondents for making payment of compensation amount of 8.10 bighas land of the petitioner which was taken by the respondents way back in 1976-77 for construction of Gogri-Narayanpur Embankment in different L.A. Case Nos. 76-77.”

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that during the year 1974–75, the Government decided to construct an embankment along the river Ganga, namely the Gogri–Narayanpur Embankment, for which large tracts of land were acquired by the State. In the course of construction of the said embankment, the petitioner’s ancestral lands appertaining to Mauza Harinmar (Thana No. 376), Khata Nos. 26 and 39, Khesra Nos. 101 and 102, as well as, Mauza Timapur and Karari (Thana No. 379), Khata Nos. 300 and 164, Khesra Nos. 238 and 240, measuring a total area of 8 Bigha 10 Kattha, were also acquired after due initiation of land acquisition proceedings. Notifications under Sections 4 and 9 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, were issued by the then A.D.M., Munger. He further submitted that the said lands were ancestral properties which had fallen to the share of the petitioner’s father pursuant to Title Suit No. (25/1949)/ (41/1951), decided by the Court of Sub-Judge-I, Munger. Learned counsel submitted that the order sheet relating to payment and the records pertaining to compensation are missing and, as reported by the record keeper, no information is available regarding payment of compensation to the petitioner or his ancestors. He further submitted that the acquisition proceedings for construction of the Gogri Dam were initiated in the year 1977–78 in accordance with the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the petitioner having not received the requisite amount of compensation till date, finally filed the present writ petition. Learned counsel has further submitted that the due compensation payable to the petitioner is required to be calculated on the basis of the Minimum Value Register (MVR) as determined by the State Government for the vicinity in which the acquired land is situated. Learned counsel has also placed reliance upon the judgment passed by this Court in CWJC No.

14927 of 2021.

4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submitted that, in cases where compensation has been paid to the respective landholders whose lands were acquired for the construction of the Gogri Dam, the records relating to such landholders are ordinarily maintained in the office concerned. Howeve