2026:JHHC:16817 Page | 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 4214 of 2020 ------ Prayag Sao, S/o Late Sarju Sao, Resident of Kulgo, PO-Dumri, PS- Dumri, Dist-Giridih. … … Petitioner(s) Versus 1. State of Jharkhand. 2. Deputy Commissioner, Giridih, PO, PS & Dist-Giridih. 3. District Land Acquisition Officer, Giridih, PO, PS & Dist-Giridih 4. Project Officer National High Authority of India, Giridih, PO, PS & Dist-Giridih. 5. Circle Officer, Giridih, PO, PS & Dist-Giridih. … … Respondent(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amar Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. J.F. Toppo, GA-V Mrs. Sweety Topno, Advocate ------ 13/ 11th June, 2026 1. Heard the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is the land looser and thus he is entitled for compensation. The respondents, without reasons and without there being any dispute has referred the matter to the Principal District Judge under Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act, 1956. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that though initially it was referred under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 but later on since the case is under the National Highways Act, the reference was made under Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act. He, by referring to Annexure-A to the counter-affidavit, submits that there was dispute as one Sakila Khatun, W/o Mansur Alam also claimed a share of compensation which prompted the respondents to referred the matter in terms of Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act, 1956. Lastly, he submits that the reference case is numbered as Case No. 878 of 2020-21 before the Principal District Judge, Giridih. 4. Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act, 1956 provides that if any dispute arises as to the apportionment of the amount or any part thereof or to any person to whom the same or 2026:JHHC:16817 Page | 2 any part thereof is payable, the competent authority shall refer the dispute for decision to the principal civil court of original jurisdiction. Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act, 1956 is quoted here under:- “(4). If any dispute arises as to the apportionment of the amount or any part thereof or to any person to whom the same or any part thereof is payable, the competent authority shall refer the dispute to the decision of the principal civil court of original jurisdiction within the limits of whose jurisdiction the land is situated.” 5. From Serial No.3 of Annexure-A, I find that there is some dispute of apportionment, as name of one Sakila Khatun has also appears there. 6. Though, in the aforesaid documents, reference of provision of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 has been made but later on vide Annexure-C, Letter No.426 dated 20.06.2024, the same has been corrected and the matter has been referred in terms of Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act. Serial No.15, reflects the reference of this petitioner which is numbered as 878/2020-21. 7. Considering the provision of law and the fact that there is some dispute in respect of apportionment / payment of compensation, it cannot be said that without any basis, Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act has been invoked by the respondent- authority. Thus, I find no merit in this writ petition, this writ petition is dismissed. 8. The petitioner should appear in the reference to establish his claim which should be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order. (ANANDA SEN, J.) 11.06.2026 S.K.D/CP-2 Uploaded on 16.06.2026