IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13381 of 2017 ====================================================== 1. Ram Narayan Mahto S/o Late Lakhraj Mahto 2. Abdul Kudus, S/o Late Rahman Miya 3. Ambika Prasad, S/o Late Malai Sah 4. Ramayan Mahto, S/o Late Lakhraj Mahto 5. Sakir Ansari, S/o Late Nuri Miya 6. Birjaish Prasad, S/o Late Sambhu Prasad R/o Village-Kanna Dumariya, P.O.-Korihar, P.S.-Raxaul, District-E.Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Principal Secretary, Department, of Home, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Director, Land Acquisition, Bihar, patna. 5. The Joint Secretary, Department of Home, Bihar, Patna. 6. The Collector, Motihari. 7. The Land Acquisition Officer, Motihari 8. The Union of India through the Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India, through its secretary, Nor 9. The Secretary, Border Management Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, North Block, New Delhi. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mallika Mazumdar, Advocate For the State : Mr.Sajid Salim Khan -Sc25 For the respondent : Mr. Anshay Bahadur Mathur, CGC ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 2 29-04-2025 Heard Ms. Mallika Mazumdar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Anshay Bahadur Mathur, learned C.G.C besides the learned State Counsel. 2. The present petition has been preferred for the following relief/s: Patna High Court CWJC No.13381 of 2017(2) dt.29-04-2025 2/2 (i) for issuance of mandamus on the respondent authorities to make equal payment to all owners for the same quality of land acquired for the same purpose i.e. for construction of check post at Raxaul. 3. Though, a counter affidavit has come informing that the land of village Kanna Puroshatampur to which the petitioner belongs to has not been acquired, since copy of the counter affidavit was never delivered, despite it being filed in the year 2020, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it will suffice that he is allowed to approach the appropriate authority/respondent for the redressal of the grievance. 4. Though, categorical statement has come, in view of the fact that the copy was not served and the petitioner could not file reply for which he cannot be faulted, the said liberty is granted. 5. The writ petition stands disposed of. Ravi/- (Rajiv Roy, J) U