Rajeev Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4218 of 2026 ====================================================== 1.

Rajeev Kumar S/o Nagendra Prasad Yadav, R/o- Vill.- Kishunpur Mohini, P.S- Kudhni, Dist.- Muzaffarpur, Pin Code- 844127. 2.

Pankaj Kumar, S/o- Binda Singh, R/o- Vill.- Chajan, Haria Rai Tola, P.STurki, Dist.- Muzaffarpur, Pin Code- 844127. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

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

2.

The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, Dist.- Muzaffarpur. 3.

The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, West Muzaffarpur, Dist.- Muzaffarpur. 4.

Sri Dharmendra Kumar, The Revenue Officer (R.O), As a Circle Officer Kudhni Muzaffarpur, Dist. Muzaffarpur.

5.

Chitranjan, S/o- Sri Chandeshwar Pd. Singh, R/o Vill.- Balaur, P.S- Kudhni, Dist- Muzaffarpur.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar No. 1, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Gyan Prakash Jha, GA-7 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 07-04-2026 Heard Mr. Arun Kumar-1, learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. The present application has been preferred for the following relief(s):

(i) That the illegal, improper, incorrect and unconstitutional order dt. 0112-2026 passed in Mutation Case No. -5992, R27/2025-2026 by Dharmendra Kumar (R.O. as C.O.) Circle Officer, Muzaffarpur contained in Ax. - 3 may kindly be finally setaside, whereby and where under, without

2/4 considering the reality of fact that Deepak Kumar and Ashutosh Kumar were not legally entitled to sale the lands of Akhileshwar Shahi @ Achileshwar Shahi, because the (Akhileshwar Shahi) had only one daughter namely Kundan Devi, who had already sold her share 2 Acre and 7.5 Dec. of Land which was the share of Achileshwar Shahi @ Akhileshwar Shahi vide registered sale deed no. 10861 dt. 21-04-2025 in favor of Sakshi Priya and she is in possession of said 2 Acre and 7.5 Dec. of land.

In other hand there is no dispute of title at all in the share of Laliteshwar Shahi, who has only one daughter in Law namely Veena Shahi, W/o - Late Hemant Shahi, sold her share of 2 Acre and 7.5 Dec. of Land in favor of the petitioners namely Rajeev Kumar and Pankaj Kumar vide registered sale deed dt. - 22-11-2025 bearing sale deed no. - 34120 and since then the petitioners are in peaceful possession of the said lands. There is no dispute of title at all in this land. (ii) That the Respondents also be directed to not disturb the possession of the Land bearing 2 Acre and 7.5 Dec. situated at Mauza - Thatian, P.S. - Kudhni, Circle Office- Kudhni, Dist. Muzaffarpur, bearing Thana No. - 168, Halka Blaur Dih, Khata No. 1, Plot No. 1143 area of 2 Acre and 7.5

3/4 Dec. (207.5 Dec.) boundary whereof is N- Shivnandan Sahni.

S- Sakshi Priya.

E- Ramnandan Sahni & Suman Saurabh.

W-Chandeshwar Singh.

(iii) That the Respondents be strictly directed to open the Jamabandi in the name of the Petitioners.

(iv) That during the pendency of this case Respondents be also directed to not disturb them if they make any constructions upon the said lands.

(v) That during the pendency of this writ petition, operation/execution of impugned order dt. - 01-12-2026 passed in Mutation Case No. - 5992-R27/2025-2026 (Αχ. - 3) may kindly be directed to remain stayed and Respondents be directed to make mutation of lands of Ax. - 1 in favor of the Petitioners as there is no dispute of title in this land.

(vi) That any other relief or reliefs may kindly be granted in favor of the Petitioner as it may be deemed fit and proper to the facts and circumstances of this case.

3. After some argument, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that against the said order, he shall be approaching the Superior Revenue Authority in next eight

4/4 weeks.

4. If such petition is preferred, it will be duty of the concerned authority to issue notice and hear the parties and further to take it to its logical conclusion at an earliest, preferably within a period of six months.

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

(Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U