Ramnath Ray v. The State Of Bihar,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7934 of 2026 ====================================================== 1.

Ramnath Ray, Son of Girija Ray, Resident of Village- Sabalpur, P.S.- River, District- Patna, Bihar.

2.

Ram Janam Singh, Son of Late Jamun Singh, Resident of Village- Natha Chak, P.O.- Kachi Dargah, P.S.- Didarganj, District- Patna, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Main Secretariat, Patna. 2.

The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Patna, District- Patna. 3.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Patna City, District- Patna. 4.

The Circle Officer, Patna Sadar, District- Patna. 5.

The Block Development Officer, Didarganj Block, District- Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pankaj Maijorwar, Adv.

Mr. Akshat Sinha, Adv.

Mr. Akshay, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Arvind Ujwal, SC-4 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RANA VIKRAM SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 30-06-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. The main grievance of the petitioners is that without disposing the representation dated 06.12.2025, duly received in the Office of the Collector Patna, highlighting the

2/5 conduct of the persons who have tried to grab their land, the Collector, Patna (respondent No. 2) passed an order dated 18.10.2024, directing the construction of Panchayat Bhavan over the Raiyati land of the petitioners, without even issuing any notice or without even giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.

3. It has further been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the Collector, Patna (respondent No. 2) has passed an order in a very arbitrary manner, giving direction for construction of Panchayat Bhavan on the Raiyati land of the petitioners, a copy of order of the same could be supplied to the petitioners by the Collector, Patna (respondent No. 2) at a very late stage.

4. It has next been submitted that the moment the petitioners came to know about the said order passed by the Collector, Patna (respondent No. 2), they filed many representations before him, but all seems to have fallen on deaf ears and no order has been passed by the Collector, Patna (respondent No. 2) till date.

5. At last, it has been submitted that the land of the petitioners has neither been acquired for the aforesaid purpose of construction of Panchayat Bhavan nor has ever

3/5 donated for the construction of the Panchayat Bhavan.

6. Thus, in these circumstances, the order dated 18.10.2024, passed by Collector, Patna (respondent No. 2) is totally untenable in the eyes of law and is fit to be termed as arbitrary, illegal and as such, the same is fit to be set aside.

7. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that the petitioners have been deliberately suppressed the real facts, which cannot be decided in the writ jurisdiction, but the only authority is the respondent/Collector and their sub-ordinate Officers, who could decide the claim of the petitioners with respect to the nature of the land and since the petitioners have already filed representation, which is pending before the Collector, Patna (respondent No. 2), it would be apposite to issue necessary directions to the concerned respondent to consider and pass necessary orders in accordance with law.

8. After having heard the parties and gone through the averments made in the present writ application, duly supported by documents annexed therewith, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioners have made out a case to be considered by the Collector, Patna (respondent No.

2) and it also appears that no notice of any nature has ever

4/5 been given to the petitioners prior to passing the order of construction of Panchayat Bhavan over the piece of land which the petitioners claimed to be their Raiyati land.

9. In the aforesaid circumstances, the Collector, Patna (respondent No. 2) is duty bond to consider the objections raised by the petitioners and also to examine the documents so submitted by them and if he deems fit, he may also give opportunity to the petitioners of personal hearing in order to make himself more conversant with the facts and also for verifying the same with the revenue authorities of the district.

10. Till such decision by the Collector, Patna (respondent No. 2) on the representation so filed by the petitioners is taken, the construction work with respect to Panchayat Bhavan over the Raiyati land of the petitioners shall remain stayed.

11. In case, the Collector, Patna (respondent No.

2) comes to conclusive finding that the land in question is of Raiayati nature belonging to the petitioners, then he will pass necessary orders, modifying his earlier order(s) or otherwise, if the claim of the petitioners does not find any substantiation from the record, then he is free to pass a reasoned and

5/5 speaking order within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order in consonance with the legal provisions and judicial pronouncements of this Court.

12. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition stands disposed off.

13. Interlocutory application(s), if any, also stands disposed off accordingly.

(Rana Vikram Singh, J) Praveen-II/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 01.07.2026 Transmission Date N/A