Upendra Kumar vs The State of Bihar — CWJC/18429/2023
Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 05th May 2026.
CNR: BRHC011159312023
Filing Number
CWJC/25378/2023
Filing Date
30-Nov-2023
Registration No
CWJC/18429/2023
Registration Date
27-Dec-2023
Judge
Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy
Coram
Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
CIVIL WRIT ( 15 )
Sub-Category
LAND ACQUISITION ( 5900 )
Judicial Branch
Judicial Section
Decision Date
05-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED
Last updated 01-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Upendra Kumar
Adv. Akash Kumar Mishra
Respondent(s)
-
1.The State of Bihar
Adv. ,Maurya Vijay Chandra,Saket Tiwary,Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey 1123
-
2.The Special Secretary,
-
3.The Project Director,
-
4.The District Magistrate,
-
5.The Deputy Collector Land Reforms,
-
6.The District Land Acquisition Officer,
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
05-May-2026
Mr. Justice Rajiv RoyView PDF
Case Summary: CWJC/18429/2023 The Patna High Court disposed of Upendra Kumar's writ petition challenging land acquisition proceedings for a ring road project in Saran District. The petitioner sought reclassification of his land from agricultural to commercial status and recalculation of compensation, alleging improper valuation in Award No. 115. Justice Rajiv Roy allowed the petitioner to approach the Arbitrator-cum-Divisional Commissioner within four weeks to pursue alternative redressal, with the court noting the petition's two-and-a-half-year pendency to be considered for limitation purposes. The writ petition was disposed of with this observation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
05-May-2026
For Admission
Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy
-
03-Jan-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
30-Nov-2023
Case filed
Registration No. CWJC/18429/2023
Case Summary: CWJC/18429/2023 The Patna High Court disposed of Upendra Kumar's writ petition challenging land acquisition proceedings for a ring road project in Saran District. The petitioner sought reclassification of his land from agricultural to commercial status and recalculation of compensation, alleging improper valuation in Award No. 115. Justice Rajiv Roy allowed the petitioner to approach the Arbitrator-cum-Divisional Commissioner within four weeks to pursue alternative redressal, with the court noting the petition's two-and-a-half-year pendency to be considered for limitation purposes. The writ petition was disposed of with this observation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts