Disposed

Kauleshwar Choudhary v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC12 Feb 2026WPC/2422/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Landowners sought fair compensation for residential/commercial land acquired for a national highway, complaining their objections before the Competent Authority were undisposed. The Court directed the District Land Acquisition Officer to decide the objections per government notifications, pass orders on compensation or refer to arbitration, within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to District Land Acquisition Officer to decide compensation objections per Annexures-4 and 5 or refer to arbitrator, within eight weeks.

Kauleshwar Choudhary Vs the State of Jharkhand — Land Acquisition | Jharkhand HC (2026)

¶1

2026:JHHC:4167

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

W.P.(C) No. 2422 of 2021

¶4

Koleshwar Chodhary, aged about 53 years, son of Sri Dilo Choudhary,

¶5

Fagu Sao, aged about 72 years, son of Late Bandhan Sao,

¶6

Khago Mahto, aged about 72 years, son of Late Tilak Mahto,

¶7

Khiru Mahto, aged about 87 years, son of Late Tilak Mahto,

¶8

Sugan Mahto, aged about 59 years, son of Late Tilak Mahto,

¶9

Raju Yadav, aged about 44 years, son of Late Sohar Gope,

¶10

Surendra Yadav, aged about 52 years, son of Late Sohar Gope,

¶11

Dwarika Yadav, aged about 50 years, son of Late Ramu Gope,

¶12

Santosh Yadav, aged about 42 years, son of Late Ramu Gope, All are residents of Village- Urwan, PO & PS: Chandwara, DistrictKoderma ... … Petitioner(s)

¶13

Versus

¶14

The State of Jharkhand

¶15

Deputy Commissioner, Koderma, PO, PS & District- Koderma

¶16

Additional Collector, Koderma, PO, PS & District- Koderma

¶17

District Land Acquisition Officer, Koderma, PO, PS & DistrictKoderma

¶18

Executive Engineer, National Highway, Dhanbad Division, PO, PS & District- Dhanbad ... … Respondent(s)

¶19

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

¶20

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. A. K. Sahani, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Roy, Advocate Mrs. Sweety Topno, Advocate

¶21

¶22

Order No.6 /Dated: 12^th February 2026

¶23

The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioners praying for a direction upon the respondents especially the respondent no. 4 either to determine proper and fair compensation in respect of residential/commercial land with building in the light of parameter provided in Sub-section (7) of Section 3(G) of the National Highways Act, 1956 or refer the matter for determination of amount of compensation by the respondent no. 3 in terms of Sub-section (5) of

¶24

¶25

2026:JHHC:4167

¶26

Section 3(G) of the said Act. The petitioners have further prayed for compensation with interest thereof.

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioners draws attention of this Court towards Anenxure-6 and submits that this objection was filed by the petitioners along with other villagers before the District Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Competent Authority but the said objection has not yet been disposed of. Accordingly, the concerned officer may be directed to dispose of the representation in accordance with law and also in the light of the notifications of the Government (Annexures-4 and 5).

¶28

Learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the NHAI fairly submit that the concerned respondent may be directed to dispose of the objection in the light of aforesaid notifications.

¶29

Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the instant writ application is hereby disposed of by directing the respondent no.4 to decide the objection in accordance with law and applicable rules and regulation especially Annexures- 4 and 5 to this writ application and pass an appropriate order with regard to compensation or refer the matter to the arbitrator as per the law. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of the copy of this order.

¶30

Pending I.As, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶31

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

¶32

12^th February 2026 Amit Uploaded on .14/03/2026

¶33

Kauleshwar Choudhary v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kauleshwar Choudhary v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Radha Mohan Sharma Vs Education

Shashi Nayak Vs the State of Jharkhand

Amit Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Secretary Industries

Ms Rahul Distributors through Its Proprietor Sri Naresh Kumar Rastogi Vs State of Jharkhand

Poonam Kumari Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Amit Kumar Singh Vs District Magistrate Collectorate Office