Satyendra Kumar @ Satendra Prasad, v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9467 of 2025 ====================================================== Satyendra Kumar @ Satendra Prasad, S/o Late Keshav Rai, R/o West Lohanipur, Kathpul, P.S.- Kadamkuan, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through The Additional Chief Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Under Secretary, Revenue and land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Director, Consolidation-cum-Joint Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4.

The District Magistrate, Patna.

5.

The District Magistrate, West Champaran.

6.

The Deputy Collector, Establishment, Patna Collectorate, Patna. 7.

The Additional Collector, Patna Collectorate, Patna. 8.

The Additional District Magistrate (Revenue), Patna Collectorate, Patna. 9.

The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Patna Sadar, Patna. 10.

The Circle Officer, Patna Sadar, Patna.

11.

Mahendra Prasad Gupta, S/o not known, the then Circle Officer, Patna Sadar, Patna, presently posted as Deputy Director, Consolidation Directorate, Patna.

12.

Jitendra Pandey, Son of Chandrika Pandey, the then Circle Officer, Patna Sadar, Patna, presently posted as Executive Officer at Araria. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rakesh Mohan Singh, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. K N Jha, AC to GP-11 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 23-06-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner has approached this Court for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus seeking a direction upon the concerned District Magistrate to initiate departmental proceeding against the respondent no. 11, who had been

Patna High Court CWJC No.9467 of 2025(2) dt.23-06-2025 2/3 working as Circle Officer, Patna in the year 2012-13.

3. It is informed to this Court that earlier the petitioner had approached this Court in CWJC No. 19528 of 2024 for the reliefs, noted hereinbelow:

"That this writ application is being filed for the issuance of Writ of MANDANUS commanding the Respondent no.2 to initiate departmental proceeding against the Respondent no.8, who was posted as Circle Officer, Patna, in the year 2012-13 and during the said tenure, he had intentionally, with criminal motive, interpolated land records to benefit those persons against whom Encroachment Case No. 17/22-23 had been initiated, pursuant to the direction/order of this Hon'ble Court, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 5002/2021 and in furtherance of such interpolation of land records, overlooking all laws of Revenue Reforms and on the basis of fake and fabricated documents, mutation of public land was carried out in the name of one Nand Kishore Singh, for which he has been made accused in Kadamkuan P.S. Case No. 313/23, by the Petitioner."

4. The matter was taken up on 03.01.2025. After some arguments, the petitioner was extended the liberty to approach before the Additional Chief Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, for redressal of his grievance.

5. Referring to the order passed by this Court, learned Advocate for the petitioner thus contended that pursuant to the liberty extended to the petitioner, he immediately filed a detailed representation before the Additional Chief Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, the copy

Patna High Court CWJC No.9467 of 2025(2) dt.23-06-2025 3/3 of which is marked as Annexure-P/2. However, to the utter surprise, that more than three months have been lapsed, but till date, it did not bring to its logical conclusion.

6. Learned Advocate for the State submits that, prima facie, for the same relief, the petitioner has approached this Court and invoking the jurisdiction of this Court for disposal of the representation, is in no way appreciable. It is further contended that since no time frame has been mentioned in the order passed in the earlier round of litigation and only liberty was extended to him to approach before the authorities concerned, therefore, no positive order could be passed.

7. Be that as it may, considering the fact that pursuant to the order of this Court passed in CWJC No. 19528 of 2024, the petitioner has approached the authorities concerned by filing a detailed representation. Hence, in any view of the matter, it is expected that the same must be brought to its logical conclusion, however, in any case, preferably within a period 12 weeks, from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

8. With the aforesaid observation and expectation, the writ petition stands disposed off.

(Harish Kumar, J) shivank/- U