Patna High Court
CWJC/12617/2026 of Umashankar Ray Vs The State of Bihar on 18 August 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12617 of 2026 ====================================================== Umashankar Ray Son of Late Ram Nagina Ray, Resident of Bradahiya, P.O.- Bardahiya, Marhaurha District- Saran (Bihar) PIN- 841419. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12617 of 2026
======================================================
Umashankar Ray Son of Late Ram Nagina Ray, Resident of Bradahiya, P.O.- Bardahiya, Marhaurha District- Saran (Bihar) PIN- 841419.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2.
The District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra.
3.
The District Land Acquisition Officer, Saran at Chapra.
4.
The Circle Officer, Chapra Sadar, District Saran.
5.
The Executive Engineer / Project Director, Double Decker Flyover Project, Chapra, under the Road Construction Department, Govt. of Bihar.
6.
Sona Devi, W/o Late Sarvanand Singh, Mohalla- Pachimari Telpa, Garkha Road, P.S.-Chapra Muffasil, P.O.- Chapra, 841301.
7.
Parmanand Singh, S/o Late Pohlahwan Singh, Vill. and Post- Koryea, P.S.- Bheldi, Dist.-Saran, Bihar- 841218.
8.
Moujilal Singh, S/o Late Pohlahwan Singh, Vill. and Post- Koryea, P.S.- Bheldi, Dist.-Saran, Bihar, 841218.
... ... Respondent/s
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr.Ashutosh Nath, Advocate
For the Respondent/s
:
Mrs.Archana Meenakshee, GP- 06
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
18-08-2026 Heard Mr.Ashutosh Nath, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Archana Meenakshee, learned counsel for the State.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the following relief/s:
(i) issue an appropriate writ/order/direction in the nature of certiorari quashing and setting aside the order dated 16.06.2026
passed by the District Magistrate, Saran, being unreasoned, arbitrary, and passed in flagrant disregard of the directions of this Hon'ble Court in CWJC No. 2287/2026;
(ii) issue an appropriate writ/order/direction in the nature of mandamus directing that the question of title and rightful entitlement to compensation over the suit land (Khata No. 75, Plot No. 83, Mauza Pashchimari Telpa) be referred to a competent civil court/reference court for adjudication, in view of the disputed and complex nature of title;
(iii) issue
an
appropriate writ/order/direction in the nature of mandamus restraining the respondents from releasing or disbursing compensation under Award No. 37, or any part thereof, to the private opposite party, until the dispute stands finally adjudicated by the competent court, and directing that the compensation amount be kept in deposit/escrow in the meantime;
(iv) issue
an
appropriate writ/order/directions in the nature of mandamus stay the operation and implementation of the order dated 16.06.2026 passed by the District Magistrate, Saran, and, in particular, restrain the respondents from releasing disbursing, or paying any part of the compensation under Award No. 37 to the private opposite party; In the alternative, direct the respondents to keep the compensation amount payable under Award No. 37 in deposit, without disbursing the same to either party, until further orders of this Hon'ble Court;
(v) grant any other relief(s), including costs, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.
3. After some argument, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he shall be moving before the competent Civil Court for the redressal of the grievance.
4. Learned State counsel has no objection.
5. In that background, the writ petition is disposed of with allowing the petitioner to prefer an appropriate petition alongwith the relevant document before competent Civil Court within a period of eight weeks.
6. It is expected that the concerned Court will be taking the matter to its logical conclusion at an earliest.
Ravi/- (Rajiv Roy, J) U