IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No.343 of 2025 ----- Vijay Kumar Singh @ Vijay Singh, S/o Late Shambhu Singh, R/o H. No.89, Kasiyan Tola, Redma, P.O. & P.S.-Daltonganj, District-Palamau, Jharkhand. .......... Petitioner. -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand through Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms, Ranchi. 2. The Deputy Commissioner, Palamau. 3. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Palamau. 4. The Circle Officer, Medninagar Sadar, Daltonganj, Palamau. 5. The Project Director of National Highway Authority of India, Palamau. .......... Respondents. ----- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Sheo Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Roy, AC to GA-III For Res.-NHAI : Mrs. Sweety Topno, Advocate Mr. Amrit Raj Kisku, Advocate ----- Order No.05 Date: 20.03.2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the concerned respondent to pay compensation to the petitioner for utilizing his land appertaining to Khata No.144, Plot No.62/B, Village-Hisra @ Pokhraha, Thana No.210, measuring an area of 5.81 acres for widening of NH-75 at Village-Hisra @ Pokhraha, District Palamau without paying any compensation to him merely on the ground that the said land has been recorded as Gair Mazarua Aam/Gair Mazarua Khas/Qaisar-e-Hind. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid land was purchased by the petitioner vide registered sale deed dated 6th June, 2017. A correction slip with respect to the said land was also issued to him by the respondent no.4-Circle Officer, Sadar Medninagar. Despite that the petitioner has not been paid any compensation by the respondents for utilising the said land for widening of NH-75. 3. Mr. Rakesh Kr. Roy, learned A.C. to G.A.-III, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent nos.1 to 5 submits that the aforesaid claim of the petitioner is required to be factually examined by the competent authority i.e. respondent no.3- District Land Acquisition Officer, Palamau. Hence, if the petitioner prefers a fresh representation in this regard before the respondent no.3, an appropriate decision in accordance with law will be taken by the said respondent within a time frame. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of the prayer made in the writ petition, without entering into merit of the case, the petitioner is given liberty to prefer a fresh representation along with relevant documents in this regard before the respondent no.3-District Land Acquisition Officer, Palamau. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent no.3 after verifying the relevant records and on providing due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, shall take an informed decision in accordance with law within eight weeks from the date of filing of the representation. 5. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of with the aforesaid liberty and direction. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) Vikas/ -2- W.P. (C) No.343 of 2025