Smt. Saroj Devi And ANR v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16755 of 2015 ====================================================== 1.
Smt. Saroj Devi and Anr wife of Late Sohan Prasad, Resident of Mohalla. Kumharar, Opposite D.A.V. Public School, P.S.. Kadam Kuan, District. Patna 2.
Smt. Aarti Kumari, Wife of Shri Ranjit Kumar, Resident of A/III, Peoples Cooperative Colony, Kankarbag, P.S.. Kankarbag, District. Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State Of Bihar and Ors 2.
The District Magistrate, Patna 3.
The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Patna City, Patna 4.
The Sub Divisional Officer, Patna City, Patna 5.
The Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna 6.
The Circle Officer, Patna Sadar, Patna 7.
The Anchal Amin, Fatuha, District. Patna 8.
Shri Arvind Kumar, S/o Not known to the petitioners, Resident of Mohalla. Kumharar, Proprietor M/s Golu Traders, P.S.. Agam Kuan, District. Patna 9.
Meena Devi, Wife of Shri Sunil Kumar, C/o Prof. Ramnandan Prasad, Jag Jivan Gali, Jagar Narayan Road, P.S.. Kadamkuan, District. Patna ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Bishnu Kant Dubey, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Anuj Kumar, AC to SC-12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 15.04.2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Bishnu Kant Dubey and learned counsel for the State, Mr. Anuj Kumar.
2. In the present writ application, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 21.08.2015 passed in Land Dispute Case No.65/2012-13
2/6 by the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Patna City, whereby giving a wrong interpretation to Section 4 (2) of the Bihar Land Disputes Resolution Act, 2009, the land dispute case filed by the petitioner for removal of encroachment and for restraining the private respondents from making any construction over the encroached portion of the land has been dismissed/closed on the grounds that the Deputy Collector Land Reforms (for brevity 'DCLR') did not have the power of review or the power to restart the proceeding.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from a bare perusal of order dated 30.04.2013 (Annexure-4) passed in Land Dispute Case No. 65/2012-13 filed by the petitioner, it shall be clear that DCLR, Patna City, had himself passed an order directing for survey to be done by Amin after depositing fee of Rs. 1130/- and after the receipt of the report from the Amin, the matter/case was to be put up again before him for passing an appropriate order. The operative portion of the order dated 30.04.2013, is as follows:- उभयपककारोकेववदानअवधवकताओंकेदाराप्रसतुततकर एवंउपलबधकरायेगयेकागजात, अंचलअवधकारी, पटनासदरके पत्रकेआलोकमेसथलकीनापीहेतुवावदनीगणअमीनदारानापी करानेकाशुलक1130.00 रपयेनजारतमेजमाकरे।नापीशुलक जमाकरनेकेउपरानतअंचलफतुहाँकेसरकारीअमीनसेनापीकरने
3/6 काआदेशवनगरतकरे।नापीप्रवतवेदनप्रापतहोतेहीअवभलेख पुनःउपसथावपतकरे।आदेशकीप्रवतथानाधयकअगमकुंआएवं अंचलअवधकारी, पटनासदरकोभेजे।
4. The petitioner further submits that in compliance of the order dated 30.04.2015, the Amin conducted the survey and submitted his report on 05.08.2013 in which, he observed that encroachment had been done on the petitioner's land. This report was placed before the DCLR, Patna City for passing final order, as per his previous order dated 30.04.2013, but the DCLR, Patna City, instead of taking note of the report submitted by the Amin Fatua, has arbitrarily decided to close the proceeding by contending that under Section 4(2) of the Bihar Land Disputes Resolution Act, 2009, he did not have the power of review or to restart the proceeding. This order was passed by him on 21.08.2015 (Annexure-12). The petitioner, being aggrieved with this order, has challenged the same by filing the present writ application.
5. On 21.03.2025, this Court had directed the State to file a supplementary counter affidavit personally sworn by the District Magistrate, Patna. The said affidavit has been filed and from the perusal of Annexure-R/A to this supplementary counter affidavit, which is an order dated 01.04.2025, passed by the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Patna, it is manifest that even
4/6 the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Patna, agrees/admits that the impugned order dated 21.08.2015 passed by DCLR, Patna City is not legal and proper. The relevant part of the order dated 01.04.2025 passed by the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Patna, is quoted herein below:- उपयुरकतववणरततथयोएवंभूवमवववादवनराकरणअवधवनयम वादसं0-65/2012-13 केपवरशीलनसेसपषटहैवक:- 1.
भूवमवववादवनराकरणअवधवनयमवादसं0-65/2012-13 मे ततकालीनभूवमसुधारउपसमाहरार, पटनावसटीदारावदनांक30.04.2013 कोपावरतयथाववणरतआदेश, ....."
मापीशुलकजमाकरनेकेउपरानत अंचलफतुहोकेसरकारीअमीनसेमापीकरनेकाआदेशवनगरतकरे"। मापी प्रवतवेदनप्रापतहोतेहीअवभलेखपुनःउपसथावपतकरे।"
आदेशफलक काअंशमात्रहै। 2.
तदोपरानतमापीप्रवतवेदनप्रापतहोनेपरभूवमवववाद वनराकरणअवधवनयमवादसं0-65/2012-13 मेवदनाक21.08.2015 को ततकालीनभूवमसुधारउपसमाहरार, पटनावसटीदारामापीप्रवतवेदनके आधारपरप्रावधानअनतगरतमुखरआदेशपावरतनकरभूवमवववाद वनराकरणअवधवनयम2009 कीधारा-4 (2) कीगलतवयाखयाकरतेहुएवाद कीकारवाईसमापतकरदीगयी। इसप्रकारउकतवादमेअंवतममुखर आदेशपावरतहीनहींहै , वजससेवादकीकारवाईपूणरनहींहुईहै।अतएव यहपुनववरलोकनकामामलानहींबनताहै। अत :
उकतकेआलोकमेभूवमसुधारउपसमाहतार , पटनावसटी दाराभूवमवववादवनराकरणअवधवनयमवादसं 0-65/2012-13 मेमापी प्रवतवेदनकाअवलोकनएवंसभीपकोकोसुनवाईकायुवकतयुकतअवसर
5/6 देतेहुएवववधवत्मुखरआदेशपावरतवकयाजानासमीचीनहै।परनतुउकत कारवाईसी०डबलू०जे०सी०सं 0-16755/2015 श्रीमतीसरोजदेवीएवंअनय बनामराजयएवंअनयमेमाननीयउचचनयायालयदारापावरतआदेशके अनुरपकीजायेगी।
6. The learned counsel appearing for the State agrees with the order passed by the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Patna, wherein he has unequivocally held that the order of the DCLR dated 21.08.2015 is improper and is an incorrect interpretation of Section 4(2) of the Bihar Land Disputes Resolution Act, 2009.
7. In view of the submissions made by the parties and after careful perusal of the relevant records, this Court is of the view that the order impugned in the present date application i.e. the order dated 21.08.2015 passed by the DCLR, Patna City in Land Dispute Case No.65/2012-13 is improper and amounts to incorrect interpretation of Section 4(2) of the Bihar Land Disputes Resolution Act, 2009 and hence, the same is quashed. The matter is remanded back to the DCLR, Patna City for a fresh consideration of the entire matter, in light of the report submitted by the Amin on 05.08.2013. The DCLR, Patna city shall pass a fresh order which shall be reasoned and speaking order and after giving due opportunity to the petitioner concerned. The DCLR, Patna City will pass an order preferably
6/6 within a period of four weeks from today. The other private parties should also be heard before disposing of the matter.
8. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the present writ application stands disposed of. All the pending Interlocutory Applications will also be deemed to have been disposed of.
(Alok Kumar Sinha, J) sharun/- U