Supreme Court Refuses To Interfere With Bihar's Sikrahana River Dam Project

The Supreme Court today refused to interfere in a plea challenging the decision of the Patna High Court, which dismissed a batch of petitions seeking directions not to widen the boundary of the Sikrahana River and Dam Project under construction. The Court granted liberty to the petitioners make a representation before the authorities.

The bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi was hearing a challenge to the Patna High Court order, which upheld the Bihar government's decision to construct an embankment along the Sikrahana River in the Western Champaran District of Bihar.

The High Court held that the issue of embankment requires expert opinion and would warrant no judicial interference.

The petitioners approached the Supreme Court claiming that the embankment would lead to flooding of their lands.

The Senior Counsel for the petitioner stressed that the state government has proceeded with the embankment project on the basis of the research done in 1978.

The counsel for the expert body also submitted that the government should consider various aspects, such as how many people would be affected by this decision and what relief and rehabilitation would be provided to the affected persons. As per the cost benefit analysis, it would mean that 2 lakh people would be submerged to benefit 4-5 lakh people.

The CJI remarked that the estimates about flooding/ rehabilitation would only be considered after the construction of the project is completed.

The bench refused to interfere with the impugned order, however the petitioners will be allowed to make a representation before the authorities and stakeholders.

" The issues raised by the petitioners are highly technical in nature; it is difficult for us to express any opinion in relation thereto. Consequently, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the SLP/Writ Petition with the liberty to the petitioners to make a representation before the concerned authorities/ stakeholders. All of them are directed to consider such a prayer notwithstanding the fact that the petition has been dismissed."

Case Details : VISHWANATH PASWAN AND ORS. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.| Diary No. 8948-2026