Singheshwar Choudhary Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar Singh, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sajid Salim Khan, SC-25. ======================================================

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶14

5 13-10-2025

¶15

The instant writ petition has been filed by the

¶16

petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief :-

¶17

“ 1. That, the present writ application is being filed for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing part of order contained in Memo No. 1434 dated 02.04.2019 issued by respondent no. 2, whereby and whereunder the share of the petitioner has been reduced to two dhurs two khatha arbitrarily and direction has been given to make payment of compensation on further production of documents of land ownership. The petitioner further prays for direction to respondents to remove the road constructed on private land of the petitioner without consent of the petitioner and also without acquisition of the said land and for any other relief or reliefs for which petitioner may be found to be

¶18

Patna High Court CWJC No.10167 of 2021(5) dt.13-10-2025 2/4

¶19

entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case. ”

¶20

2. Mr. Pramod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the

¶21

petitioner and Mr. Sajid Salim Khan, learned SC-25 for the State-respondents, are present and they are heard.

¶22

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner earlier filed writ petition bearing CWJC No. 12298 of 2014 for getting compensation in respect of his land, upon which the PCC road had been constructed without his consent as well as acquisition of his land. It is further submitted that during pendency of CWJC No. 12298/2014, an enquiry was made and measurement of the land in question was carried out by Anchal Amin, upon that basis, it came into light that about 3½ dhur of petitioner’s land had been used in construction of the PCC road and in this regard, Annexure- 2 is relevant. The Staterespondents in CWJC No. 12298/2014 filed their counter affidavit, upon which, this Court disposed of the said writ petition vide order dated 11.04.2017, giving liberty to the petitioner to file a representation before the District Magistrate, Samastipur, giving him a direction to pass reasoned order for redressing the petitioner’s grievance but the same was not complied in the stipulated time period, then the petitioner filed MJC No. 3646 of 2017 for compliance of the order dated

¶23

Patna High Court CWJC No.10167 of 2021(5) dt.13-10-2025 3/4

¶24

11.04.2017 and only thereafter, the District Magistrate, Samastipur, passed the impugned order dated 02.04.2019, reducing the petitioner’s share in respect of compensation of land to 2 dhur and 2 Kanma and also directed the petitioner to produce the relevant documents such as LPC, up to date land receipts, etc., before the District Land Acquisition Officer, Samastipur. It is further submitted that though the land in question has total area of 8½ dhur, out of which, it is an admitted position that about 3½ dhur land has been used for the construction of PCC road and the petitioner is therefore entitled to get compensation in respect of the entire said land, although the name of petitioner’s sole brother, namely Rambalak Choudhary, is also recorded in the Deed of Exchange as well as Jamabandi but he has no objection to the entire compensation if the same is granted to the petitioner and in this regard, the Collector/District Land Acquisition Officer, Samastipur, ought to have issued notice to the petitioner’s brother Rambalak Choudhary but in this regard no step was taken, even the petitioner was not given an opportunity of hearing on his representation.

¶25

4. Considering the aforesaid submissions, the instant writ petition is hereby disposed of, with giving a liberty to the

¶26

Patna High Court CWJC No.10167 of 2021(5) dt.13-10-2025 4/4

¶27

petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Collector/ District Magistrate, Samastipur. If the petitioner avails this liberty in the next six weeks from today then the Collector/District Magistrate, Samastipur, should issue notice to the petitioner’s sole brother, Rambalak Choudhary, to obtain his view regarding relinquishment of his right to receive compensation for his share in the land in question and after hearing both the brothers, fresh order shall be passed for deciding the petitioner’s entitlement to the compensation in respect of the land having an area of 3½ Dhur or half of the share, in the light of any objection or no-objection on the part of the petitioner’s sole brother.

¶28

5. As the petitioner is running pillar to post for the last twenty years to get compensation in respect of his land which has been admittedly used for construction of PCC road, so, the Collector/District Magistrate, Samastipur, is directed to dispose of the petitioner’s fresh representation in the next six months from the date of filing of the same, as per the provisions of prevalent law.

¶29

(Shailendra Singh, J)

¶30

annu/-

¶31

U

Singheshwar Choudhary v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Singheshwar Choudhary v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prakash Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Shamshad Ahmad @ Mohmmad Shamshad Ahmad Vs The State of Bihar

Anil Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Abu Muaz @ Abu Maz @ Abu Maz Sajdi Vs The State of Bihar

Anil Kumar Chaurasia Vs The State of Bihar

Ramashankar Mahato Vs The State of Bihar