IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6072 of 2025 ======================================================

Jiramani Devi W/o - Gopal Prasad Mahto R/o Vill- Kishunpur Tola, Jaganbigha, PS-Amba, Dis - Aurangabad ... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the District Collector, Aurangabad.

2. The District Collector, Aurangabad, Dist-Aurangabad.

3. The Additional Collector, Aurangabad, Dist-Aurangabad.

4. The land Acquisition officer, Dist - Aurangabad.

5. The Competent Authority cum Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Aurangabad, Dist - Aurangabad.

6. The Anchal Adhikari, Kutumba Anchal, Dist - Aurangabad.

7. The Project Director NHAI, Aurangabad, Bihar.

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

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brij Bihari Tiwary, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Kumar Pankaj, AC to SC-5 For the NHAI : Mr. Sriram Krishna, Advocate : Mr. Shashank Shekhar Kunwar, Advocate ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

7 16-03-2026 Heard Mr. Brij Bihari Tiwary, learned counsel for the petitioner, the State as also Mr. Sriram Krishna representing the National Highway Authority of India (henceforth for short ‘the NHAI’

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

“i. In the nature of "certiorari" for setting aside the order dated 20.12.2024 passed in the title verification case No. 26/2022-2023 by the Collector, Aurangabad whereby and where under the raiyati claim of the petitioner has been rejected.

ii. In the nature of mandamus also directing and commanding the respondent authorities for payment of compensation amount to the petitioner for the land which has been acquired by the respondents.

iii. For issuance of any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is entitled for.”

3. A counter-affidavit has come on behalf of of the Deputy Manager (T) of ‘the NHAI’ and Mr. Krishna has taken this Court to paragraph-7 which read as under:

“7. That it may be stated that the Award of compensation was passed by the Competent Authority for Land Acquisition (CALA) (respondent no. 5 herein on 03.02.2022 and 03.06.2022. That none of the land owners including the petitioner challenged the said Award dated 03.02.2022 and 03.06.2022 before the Arbitrator and therefore the said Award has attained finality.”

4. The reply to the said paragraph-7 by the petitioner is vague and there is no direct denial to it.

5. There is another paragraph of ‘the NHAI’ which shows that the petitioner received the compensation amount in the month of July 2025 but this fact was never brought to the notice of Patna High Court despite the matter being heard repeatedly and has been acknowledged only after the counter-

affidavit came by way of a rejoinder.

6. The said paragraph of the counter-affidavit read as follows:

“8. That thereafter the payment of due compensation for the lands of the petitioner herein that were acquired for the construction of NH-98 was made to the petitioner in the month of July, 2025 and therefore the writ petition filed by the petitioner has become infructuous. It is most humbly submitted that even though the petitioner received the compensation amount in the month of July 2025, yet the petitioner obtained a status quo order on 10.10.2025 without divulging this essential fact to this Hon'ble Court. It is most humbly submitted that such conduct on the part of the petitioner deserves to be seriously deprecated as the petitioner is guilty of suppression and fraud because the petitioner cannot ask for a direction for payment of compensation on one hand while on the other hand receive the compensation amount without demur and also obtain a status quo order. It is submitted that such a conduct apart from being a fraudulent one and one of suppression also tantamount to blowing hot and cold in the same breath.”

7. The contention of the petitioner is that in the garb of the said acquisi