Gayatri Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8827 of 2026 ====================================================== Gayatri Pandey wife of Chandeshwar Pandey, resident of village Jagdishpur, Panda Toli, Ward No. 01, P.O and P.S Jagdishpur, District - Bhojpur. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through The Principal Secretory, Department of Revenue and land Reforms Govt of Bihar 2.

The Deputy collector Land Reforms, Jagdishpur, Bhojpur. 3.

Anchal Adhikari, Jagdishpur, Bhojpur.

4.

Pushpa Devi, Wife of Shambhu Pandey resident of village Jagdishpur, Ward No. 02, P.O. and P.S. Jagdishpur, District Bhojpur. 5.

Roshni Kumari Daughter of Shambhu Pandey resident of village Jagdishpur, Ward No. 02, P.O. and P.S. Jagdishpur, District Bhojpur. 6.

Jyoti Kumari, daughter of Shambhu Pandey resident of village Jagdishpur, Ward No. 02, P.O. and P.S. Jagdishpur, District Bhojpur. 7.

Golu Kumari, daughter of Shambhu Pandey resident of village Jagdishpur, Ward No. 02, P.O. and P.S. Jagdishpur, District Bhojpur. 8.

Kundan Pandey, Son of Shambhu Pandey resident of village Jagdishpur, Ward No. 02, P.O. and P.S. Jagdishpur, District Bhojpur. 9.

Ratan Pandey, Son of Shambhu Pandey resident of village Jagdishpur, Ward No. 02, P.O. and P.S. Jagdishpur, District Bhojpur. 10.

Sonu Kumar, son of Rajendra Prasad, resident of village Jagdishpur, Ward No. 02, P.O. and P.S. Jagdishpur, District Bhojpur. 11.

Chandan Kumar son of Late Vijay Kumar Singh, resident of Village Ugna, P.S. - Jagdishpur, District - Bhojpur.

... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Arvind Kumar Verma, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Ajay Behari Sinha, Sr. Adv., G.A.8 Ms. Seema Ghazala, A.C. to G.A.8 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RANA VIKRAM SINGH ORAL ORDER 02-07-2026 Heard the parties.

2. At the very outset, Mr. Ajay Behari Sinha, learned G.A.8 appearing on behalf of the State submits that in compliance of the last order dated 29.06.2026 he spoke to the

2/5 concerned Circle Officer, Jagdishpur (Bhojpur), whose order is under assail before this Court. On instruction, learned Senior Counsel submits that the Circle Officer, Jagdishpur candidly admits that he has committed some error in recording the name of the parties, which might have crept in inadvertently on account of some confusion with respect to the nomenclature of the name of the parties. He further points out that in this view of the matter, if the order is taken to be as it is as of today, then the petitioner is entitled to all relief as prayed, but the sheer inadvertent mistake may be allowed to be rectified by the Circle Officer, Jagdishpur in a proceeding which he might initiate after the direction of this Court.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner also submits that initially he filed an application for mutation before the Circle Officer, Jagdishpur vide mutation case no. 1863 of 2024-25, but against the weight of evidence the Circle Officer, Jagdishpur vide order dated 07.01.2025 rejected his application for mutation of the land in question as detailed hereinbelow:

Khata No.

Plot No.

Area 0 acre, 45.625 Dec, 0 hectare 0 acre, 23 Dec, 0 hectare 0 acre, 27.75 Dec, 0 hectare Situated in Mauja Jagdishpur, Revenue Thana No. 241, District

3/5 Bhojpur. Aggrieved by that order of the Circle Officer, he preferred a Mutation Appeal before the DCLR, Jagdishpur vide Mutation Appeal No. 1414 of 2025-26 which was heard and disposed off by DCLR, Jagdishpur vide order dated 31.12.2025 whereby he allowed the appeal of the petitioner and set aside the order passed by Circle Officer, Jagdishpur with a direction to him to pass a proper and fresh order on the application of petitioner for mutation strictly in accordance with the documents available on record and that too after verifying it from the revenue records.

4. Subsequent thereto, the petitioner approached the Circle Officer, Jagdishpur, praying for the mutation of the aforesaid land in his name. The Circle Officer, Jagdishpur while passing the order dated 29.01.2026 in Mutation Case No. 2629 of 2025-26 recorded the finding in favour of the petitioner and as it appears from the order impugned that he has even issued direction for the mutation of the land in favour of the petitioner. Surprisingly enough, in compliance of the aforesaid order the mutation receipt was issued in the name of objector which has given an occasion to the petitioner to approach this Court directly in the writ jurisdiction, with a prayer to direct the concerned authorities to issue a mutation receipt in his name for

4/5 which the order has already been passed in his favour by the competent authority, i.e., Circle Officer, Jagdishpur in view of the direction issued by the DCLR, Jagdishpur under order dated 31.12.2025.

5. Heard the parties and perused the records. If the Court goes by the documents available on record, no option will be left but to issue a direction to the concerned authorities for issuance of the mutation receipt in the name of the petitioner. Since Mr. Ajay Behari Sinha, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the State, at the request of the Court, took instruction from the Circle Officer, Jagdishpur who very fairly and candidly accepted that he has committed some mistake which is inadvertent and bonafide in nature, so he may be accorded permission to rectify the same.

6. Considering the aforesaid submissions made on behalf of the learned counsel by respective parties and on perusal of the records, it appears that the petitioner has made out a case before the DCLR, Jagdishpur to get mutation in his name and thereafter Circle Officer, Jagdishpur though have recorded findings in his favour, but has granted mutation receipt in the name of the object or both appears to be dichotomous. In these circumstances, the order impugned dated 31.12.2025 cannot be

5/5 sustained and is accordingly set aside and the learned Circle Officer, Jagdishpur is hereby directed to pass a fresh order considering the case and document of the petitioner and that too keeping in mind the findings recorded by DCLR, Jagdishpur and pass a fresh and positive order with respect to the mutation application so filed on behalf of the petitioner.

7. It is needless to say that the petitioner will not file any further fresh application. The application which has already been filed before the Circle Officer, Jagdishpur will have to be adjudicated afresh by passing necessary, proper and reasoned order within three weeks henceforth after having heard all the necessary parties concerned. This writ application stands disposed off, accordingly.

8. All pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stand/s disposed off.

Smriti/ Supratim- (Rana Vikram Singh, J) U