IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.163 of 2017 ====================================================== Anwar Alam S/o Late Mahmuda Alam, R/o Moll Bank Road Ward no. 6, P.S. Raxual, Dist. E. Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Land Acquisition Officer E. Champaran at Motihari. 3. The District Development Commissioner E. Champaran at Motihari. 4. The Circle Officer Raxual East Champaran. 5. The Circle Inspector Raxual. 6. The Halka Karmachari Raxual. 7. The S.D.M. Raxual. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : None. For the Respondent/s : Mr.Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, GP-14 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 3 30-08-2025 None appears on behalf of the petitioner though learned G.P.-14 is present. 2. The present petition has been preferred for the following relief/s: (i) for issuance an appropriate writ /writs, order/orders, direction/directions to make acquire the land and made payment of compensation amount to the petitioner for the land on which public road [N.H.28] is Patna High Court CWJC No.163 of 2017(3) dt.30-08-2025 2/3 constructing by them; (ii) for issuance an appropriate writ/writs order/s or direction/s to the respondents to acquire the land and made payment according the rule and regulation; (iii) for issuance order/s or direction/s to the respondents to vacate the land of the petitioner on which the respondents have forcefully constructing public road. [N.H 28]; (iv) any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is found to be entitled. 3. A counter affidavit has come on behalf respondent nos. 2, 3 and 5 after service of copy to the learned counsel for the petitioner on 13.09.2018. Paragraph-11 shows that the petitioner has already received the compensation amount before the commencement of the Act and as such not entitled for further compensation under 2013 Act. 4. Learned State Counsel submits that in any case, he should have moved before the appropriate authority/Court, if aggrieved instead of filing writ petition. 5. There is neither any reply to the said counter Patna High Court CWJC No.163 of 2017(3) dt.30-08-2025 3/3 affidavit filed on behalf of respondents in the year 2018 nor there is any appearance. 6. However, the writ petition is dismissed for non- prosecution. Ravi/- (Rajiv Roy, J) U