Disposed¶41

Lalan Rai v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC13 Jul 2026CWJC/940/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Sugarcane compensation; wasted sugarcane; Jai Shree Sugar Mill, Majhaulia, West Champaran; cane supply notice dated 10.04.2014; mandamus; representation to District Sugarcane Officer (respondent no. 4); writ disposed of with direction to decide representation after hearing within three months; no adjudication on merits; Patna High Court CWJC No.940 of 2016, decided 13-07-2026; single judge; no statute or precedent cited.

What did the court decide?

No compensation awarded and no adjudication on merits; writ petition disposed of with directions to the petitioner to submit a fresh representation before respondent no. 4 within one month, and to respondent no. 4 to pass an appropriate order after affording a hearing within three months of the filing of the representation. Interlocutory application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. ¶41

Lalan Rai Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶41

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus directing respondents nos. 1-6 to facilitate compensation of Rs. 40,000/- with adequate interest for the wasted sugarcane, through respondent no. 7 (Jai Shree Sugar Mill, Majhaulia). +1 more

¶26

Court's answer

Taking into consideration that the petitioner's earlier representations are pending before the respondent authority, the Court directed the petitioner to submit a fresh representation before the concerned authority/respondent no. 4 within one month from the date of receipt of the order.

¶38

Ratio / Principle

Respondent no. 4/the concerned authority shall pass an appropriate order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within three months from the date of filing of the representation (the three-month period continuing at paragraph 40).

¶38

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J.) disposed of CWJC No.940 of 2016 filed by a cane grower seeking mandamus for compensation of Rs. 40,000/- with interest for sugarcane allegedly wasted due to the latches and negligence of respondent no. 7, the Jai Shree Sugar Mill, Majhaulia (West Champaran). The counter affidavit of respondent nos. 3 and 4 disclosed that the Mill had issued a notice on 10.04.2014 requiring cane growers to supply sugarcane before 25.04.2014, and that the petitioner had not supplied the cane. Noting that the petitioner's earlier representations were pending before the authority, the Court did not decide the compensation claim on merits but directed the petitioner to submit a fresh representation before respondent no. 4 within one month, and directed respondent no. 4 to pass an appropriate order after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing within three months of the filing of the representation. Writ petition disposed of; no costs or compensation awarded.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.940 of 2016

¶2

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

¶3

Lalan Rai Son of late Ram Sagar Rai Resident of Village- Dabariya, Police station- Nautan, District West Champaran.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Bihar and Ors

¶7

The Director, Department of Sugarcane, Govt. of Bihar,Patna.

The District Magistrate ,West Champaran, Bettiah.

¶13

The District Sugarcane Officer, Bettiah, District Bettiah.

¶14

The Block Development officer, Bettiha, District West Champaran.

¶15

The Sugarcane Officer, Bettiah Block , District West Champaran.

¶16

The Senior Manager, Jai Shree Sugar Mill, Majhaulia, Police stationMajhaulia, District West Champ

¶17

... ... Respondent/s

¶18

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

¶19

Appearance :

¶20

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bijay Prakash Singh, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sc17-Arbind Kumar No. Ii

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶23

ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 13-07-2026

¶24

The Writ petition is filed for the

¶25

following reliefs:

¶26

I. To issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus to direct the respondent no. 1 to 6 felicitate the compensation against the wasted Sugarcane of petitioner to the tune of Rs. 40,000/- with adequate interest through the private respondents no. 7 the Jai Shree Sugar Mill, Majhaulia, West

¶27

Patna High Court CWJC No.940 of 2016 dt.13-07-2026 2/4

¶28

Champaran.

¶29

II. To issue an

¶30

appropriate writ to direct the respondents to take up all measure for felicitation of compensation of petitioner against the wasting of sugarcane due to latches and negligence of respondent no. 7 the Jai Shree Sugar Mill, Majhaulia, West Champaran.

¶31

III. To restrain the respondents to not harass the petitioner by not paying compensation against the wasted sugarcane standing for supply to sugar mill (Respondent no. 7).

¶32

To grant any other reliefs to them for which the petitioner is entitled to have in connection with the aforesaid grievance.

¶33

During the course of arguments, it is

¶34

noticed that the petitioner has made several representations before the authority seeking a direction to respondent no. 7 to pay the compensation. Due to the inaction of the respondents, the present Writ petition has been filed.

¶35

Patna High Court CWJC No.940 of 2016 dt.13-07-2026 3/4

¶36

A counter affidavit was filed on behalf

¶37

of respondent nos. 3 and 4 admitting that the petitioner had made representations before the authority. The counter affidavit disclose that the Sugar Mill issued an important notice for cane growers on 10.04.2014 to supply sugarcane before 25.04.2014, failing which the Mill would not be held responsible for the standing sugarcane. The challans were free before the end of the season; however, the petitioner did not take any steps to supply the sugarcane to the Sugar Mill and is now seeking compensation. Therefore, the respondents have prayed for dismissal of the Writ petition.

¶38

Taking into consideration that the earlier representations are pending before the respondent authority, this Court directs the petitioner to submit a fresh representation before the concerned authority/respondent no. 4 within one month from the date of receipt of this order. In turn, respondent no. 4/the concerned authority shall pass an appropriate order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within

¶39

Patna High Court CWJC No.940 of 2016 dt.13-07-2026 4/4

¶40

three months from the date of filing of the representation.

¶41