Entitlement to compensation for submerged land requires prior revenue demarcation to determine the cause of submergence.

The petitioners, two farmers from District Sakti, claim to be the recorded owners of 0.26 acres of land across Khasra Nos. 1864/1 and 1864/2.

They alleged that their land was submerged in 2018 due to the construction of the Saradih Barrage by the State and sought compensation and interest under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

The State contested this, citing a departmental report dated 16.12.2025 which suggested the land had submerged naturally in the river prior to the barrage construction.

The petitioners approached the High Court seeking a direction for the disposal of their pending representation dated 11.04.2025.

1. Whether the petitioners are entitled to a fresh demarcation of their land to determine if the submergence was caused by the Saradih Barrage or natural river flow.

2. Whether the state’s alleged failure to compensate for submerged land violates the constitutional right to property.

The court relied on the constitutional mandate of Article 300A of the Constitution of India, which stipulates that no person shall be deprived of their property except by authority of law.

It also implicitly referenced the administrative principle of "due process," requiring the state to verify factual claims (such as land demarcation) before denying compensation claims by "poor farmers."

The Court observed that a significant factual dispute existed: the petitioners claimed the barrage caused the submergence, while the State claimed it was a prior natural occurrence.

Recognizing that the petitioners are "poor farmers," the Court reasoned that their grievance could only be redressed through an objective, technical process—specifically, a formal demarcation of the land after registering a revenue case.

The Court held that since Article 300A protects against deprivation of property without due process, the authorities are obligated to ascertain the exact cause of submergence to decide the eligibility for compensation.

The Court held that if the demarcation proves the land was submerged due to the Saradih Barrage, the authorities must pass an appropriate order for granting compensation to the petitioners.

No costs were awarded.