IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 3248 of 2024 1. Suresh Mahto 2. Manish Kumar Mahto 3. Sardhu Mahto ….. Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand, through the Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi 2. The Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi 3. The Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro 4. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Bokaro 5. The Circle Officer, Petarwar, Bokaro 6. The Project Director, National Highway Authority of India, Ranchi ….. Respondents ----- CORAM HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioners: Mr. Sunil Kr. Mahto For the State: Mr. Vishnu Prabhakar Pathak, A.C to S.C-V For the NHAI: Ms. Sweety Topno ----- 05/07.01.2025 The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the concerned respondents to make payment of compensation to the petitioners whose lands have been taken over by the respondents for construction of expressway under ‘Bharatmala Project’ without following the prescribed procedure under the Land Acquisition Act as well as the direction issued by the Department of Revenue, Land Reforms and Registration, Government of Jharkhand vide letter No. 334 dated 14.05.2009. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been in peaceful residential and cultivating possession over the land appertaining to Khata No. 57, Plot No. 15, Mouza-Sadmakala, Thana No. 28, Circle-Petarwar, District-Bokaro, measuring an area of 2 Acres, which was settled in favour of their ancestor, namely, Dukhi Mahto, S/o Late Gulu Mahto by the then landlord. After enactment of the Bihar Land Reforms, Act, the Jamabandi for the said land was created and the name of the petitioners’ ancestor-Chaita Mahto was running in Register-II as well as the rent receipts were continuously issued by the government till 2011. Despite the said fact, the possession of the land in question has been taken over by the concerned respondent authorities for construction of expressway under ‘Bharatmala Project’ without lawfully acquiring the same and paying appropriate compensation to the petitioners. 3. Mr. Vishnu Prabhakar Pathak, learned A.C to S.C-V appearing on behalf of the respondent-State, submits that the petitioners’ aforesaid claim is required to be factually examined by the competent authority under the National Highways Act, 1956 i.e. the respondent No.4. Hence, if the petitioners prefer a fresh representation in this regard before the respondent No.4, an appropriate decision will be taken by the said respondent within a time frame. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of the prayer made in the present writ petition, without entering into the merit of the case, the petitioners are given liberty to prefer a fresh representation along with relevant documents on the present issue before the respondent No.4. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent No.4, after verifying the relevant records and on providing due opportunity of hearing to the petitioners/their representatives (if so needed), shall take an appropriate informed decision in accordance with law within eight weeks from the date of filing of the said representation. 5. The present writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid liberty and direction. Satish/- (RAJESH SHANKAR, J)