Gagan Dev Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1934 of 2026 ====================================================== Gagan Dev Ram Son of Late Sudhan Ram, Resident of Village- Talwa, P.S.- Kotwa, District- East Champaran, Motihari.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Collector-Cum-District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari. 4.

The Addl. Collector, East Champaran, Motihari. 5.

The Anchaladhikari, Kotwa, District- East Champaran, Motihari. 6.

Ram Nath Ram, Son of Lal Dhari Ram, Resident of village- Talwa, P.S. - Kotwa, District- East Champaran, Motihari.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Advocate :

Mr. Sumit Kumar Gupta, Advocate :

Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Gupta, Advocate :

Ms. Isha Mishra, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, GP-14 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 05-02-2026 Heard Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, learned GP-14 representing the State.

2. The present petition has been preferred for the grant of following relief(s):

"(i) for issuance of writ nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 25.07. 2024 passed by Collector-Cum-District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari in Jamabandi Cancellation Case No. 17/2023-24 by which directed to respondent Anchaladhikari, Kotwa to enquire about the matter, if any, illegal

Patna High Court CWJC No.1934 of 2026(2) dt.05-02-2026 2/2 Jamabandi to inform to the court.

(ii) for further issue directions to respondent not interfere to the long standing Jamabandi running in the father of the petitioner as Jamabandi Case No.24/028 of 1970-71.

(iii) for that further give other consequential benefit to the petitioners."

3. At the outset, learned State counsel submits that by the order dated 25.07.2024, the Collector, East Champaran has merely asked the Circle Officer, Kotwa to look into the matter and submit it report. The submission is that once a report comes, naturally, the petitioner has to be notices before an order passed.

4. This Court is satisfied that the writ petition is premature, the petitioner will have the opportunity to take all the points before the Collector, East Champaran, once he gets the notice after the submission of the report of the Circle Officer, Kotwa, East Champaran.

5. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation.

(Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U