Chandeshwari Yadav @ Chandeshwari Prasad Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3921 of 2023 ====================================================== 1.
Chandeshwari Yadav @ Chandeshwari Prasad Yadav Son of Late Kunj Bihari Yadav Resident of Ward No.- 3, Near Bank of Baroda, Raghunathpur South, P.S. - Bhargama, District - Araria.
2.
Suchita Devi, Wife of Chandeshwari Yadav @ Chandeshwari Prasad Yadav, Resident of Ward No.- 3, Near Bank of Baroda, Raghunathpur South, P.S. - Bhargama, District - Araria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.
The Director, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3.
The District Magistrate, Araria.
4.
The Sub Divisional Officer, Araria.
5.
The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Forbesganj, Araria. 6.
The Circle Officer, Bhargama, District Araria. 7.
The Officer in Charge, Bhargama Police Station, Araria. 8.
Bhupendra Rishi, Son of Lutan Rishi, Resident of Village - Raghunathpur, P.S. - Bhargama, District - Araria.
9.
Sita Ram Rishi, Son of Lutan Rishi, Resident of Village - Raghunathpur, P.S. - Bhargama, District - Araria.
10.
Chandeshwari Rishi, Son of Panchu Rishi, Resident of Village - Raghunathpur, P.S. - Bhargama, District - Araria. 11.
Lakhiya Devi, wife of Late Jawahar Rishi, Resident of Village - Raghunathpur, P.S. - Bhargama, District - Araria. 12.
Jhameli Rishi, Son of Late Fani Rishi, Resident of Village - Raghunathpur, P.S. - Bhargama, District - Araria.
13.
Kheli Rishi, Son of Late Fani Rishi, Resident of Village - Raghunathpur, P.S. - Bhargama, District - Araria.
14.
Bilat Rishi, Son of Late Bhawi Rishi, Resident of Village - Raghunathpur, P.S. - Bhargama, District - Araria.
15.
Aghaniya Devi, Wife of Bittu Rishi, Resident of Village - Raghunathpur, P.S. - Bhargama, District - Araria.
16.
Manoj Rishi, Son of Late Ramadhin Rishi, Resident of Village - Raghunathpur, P.S. - Bhargama, District - Araria. 17.
Ramanand Rishi, Son of Raudi Rishi, Resident of Village - Raghunathpur, P.S. - Bhargama, District - Araria.
... ... Respondent/s ======================================================
2/4 Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Krishna Chandra, Adv.
For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Sajid Salim Khan ( Sc 25 ) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 07-04-2026 Heard Mr. Krishna Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sajid Salim Khan, learned Senior Counsel representing the State.
2. The present application has been preferred for the following relief(s):
a. For issuance of an appropriate Writ/Writs, direction/directions in the nature of Mandamus or order/orders directing the respondents to restore peaceful possession of the Petitioners over the land appertaining to Mauza-Raghunathpur, Thana No.-96, Khata No.-1155, Khesara No.-3994 (5 Acre 44 Decimal) and Khesara No.-3999 (9 Decimal) within the District of Araria, which was illegally settled by the Settlement Officer in favour of the private respondents.
b. For issuance of direction to remove the private respondents from the land in question in compliance of the order dated 13.05.2013 passed by Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Forbesganj, Araria in Case No.- 269/12-13.
c. For further kind indulgence of this Hon'ble Court to look into the matter
3/4 and the concerned respondents may be directed to produce all connected records for perusal for passing an appropriate order for ensuring payment of adequate compensation by quantifying the loss incurred to the petitioner during these periods.
d. For any other relief/reliefs that the Hon'ble court may grant in the interest of the petitioner that may be deemed appropriate and necessary in this case
3. After different orders including the last order dated 09.03.2026 passed by this Court, the State respondents finally acted in the matter. The third supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 3 to 6 records in paragraph nos. 6 to 8 that with the sufficient number of administrative/ police forces, they ensured that the encroachment is removed and the owners are/were restored their respective possessions. The encroachers created problems which were overcome in the process of removal. Ultimately, the forces prevailed and possession was restored.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that some grievance still remains.
5. This Court is of the opinion that now that the State respondents have acted bonafidely and have ensured possession/ restoration of the land; forums are always available for those
4/4 who are still aggrieved where they can agitate the matter. Time has come to consign this file.
6. Accordingly, ordered.
7. CWJC No. 3921 of 2023 is disposed of.
(Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U