Dismissed¶24

Madhusudan Sharma v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC4 Aug 2025CWJC/11755/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Land acquisition compensation; Bharat Mala Project four lane; Section 3G National Highways Act 1956; compensation deposited with Principal Civil Court Jehanabad on 22-9-2023; non-appearance of claimant; no objection required from all legal claimants; inter-family dispute over compensation; writ petition dismissed with liberty to claim compensation in accordance with law; Jehanabad, Bihar; Patna High Court; Satyavrat Verma, J; CWJC 11755/2024.

What did the court decide?

The Court was not inclined to entertain the writ application any further and, accordingly, dismissed it, the petitioner being unable to rebut the State's submission that disbursement requires no objection from all legal claimants and that he must seek his remedy before an appropriate forum. ¶24

Madhusudan Sharma Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11755 of 2024

¶3

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

¶4

Madhusudan Sharma Son of Late Basudev Sharma, resident of Village- Dehuni, P.S.Ghoshi, Anchal- Ghoshi, District- Jehanabdad.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Administrative Department, Bihar, Patna.

¶8

The District Magistrate, Jehanabad.

¶9

The District Land Acquisition Officer, Jehanabad.

¶10

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Jehanabad.

¶11

The Circle Officer, Ghoshi, District- Jehanabad.

¶12

... ... Respondent/s

¶13

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

¶14

Appearance :

¶15

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Tiwary For the Respondent/s : AC to SC-8 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶16

3 04-08-2025

¶17

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶18

AC to SC-8.

¶19

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that the land in dispute in the instant writ application was acquired for Bharat Mala Project four lane. It is next submitted that after acquisition, compensation was awarded under Section 3G of National Highways Act, 1956, but then the petitioner did not appear to receive the compensation, as such the compensation amount was deposited with Principal Civil Court, Jehanabad on 22-9-2023. It is further submitted that petitioner can collect the compensation amount from the Principal Civil Court, Jehanabad, in accordance with law.

¶20

3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner does not dispute the said submission of the learned

¶21

Patna High Court CWJC No.11755 of 2024(3) dt.04-08-2025 2/2

¶22

State counsel, but then submits that he has not got the compensation for the reason that his family members/other claimants are not giving no objection, on which the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that it appears that the dispute is in between the family members and until and unless all the legal claimants give their no objection, the amount cannot be disbursed, it is also submitted that for the said purpose, petitioner will have to seek his remedy in accordance with law before an appropriate forum.

¶23

4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

¶24

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to entertain the writ application any further. Accordingly, the writ application is dismissed.

¶25

6. However, the dismissal of the writ application will not preclude the petitioner from receiving the amount of compensation in accordance with law after completing all the formalities required.

¶26

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶27

Sumit/-

¶28

Madhusudan Sharma v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madhusudan Sharma v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raju Sharma @ Raju Kumar Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

Satyendra Prasad Singh @ Satyendra Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Dr. Sheela Sharma and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Shiv Shankar Singh @ Jitu Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Dharmendra Kumar Mishra Vs The State of Bihar

Rostam Miyan Vs The State of Bihar