← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/16191/2025disposed

Uday Narayan Jha v. The State Of Bihar

2025-11-04Mr. Justice Shailendra Singh3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16191 of 2025 ====================================================== Uday Narayan Jha, Son of Vijendra Narayan Jha, resident of VillageRamnagar, P.O.- Rebra, P.S.- Khanpur, District- Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through its Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Addl. Chief Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Addl. Chief Secretary, Planning and Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

4.

The Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

5.

The Collector, Samastipur, District- Samastipur. 6.

The Sub Divisional Officer, Samastipur Sadar, District- Samastipur. 7.

The Block Develompent Officer, Khanpur Block, District- Samastipur. 8.

The Circle Officer, Khanpur Block, District- Samastipur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raja Ram Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Ritesh Suman, AC to SC-13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 04-11-2025 The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief(s):- "(i) To quash the order dated-5-07-2025 passed by the District Magistrate/Collector, Samastipur through which the claim of title and possession over the land measuring 33 decimal situated in MaujaRnjitpur, having Thana No.212, Khata no. 17(old) 381(new), Khesra no.1304 (Old)1484(new) Circle- Khanpur, P.S.- Khanpur, District- Samastipur has been rejected by the District Magistrate without considering the documents

Patna High Court CWJC No.16191 of 2025(2) dt.04-11-2025 2/3 of title and peaceful physical possession for more that 50 years of the petitioner.

(ii) To issue direction upon Respondents to deliver physical possession of land to the petitioner which has been forcibly acquired to construct Panchayat Bhawan of Khanpur Uttary Panchayat by the Respondents measuring 33 decimal situated in MaujaRnjitpur,, having Thana No.212, Khata no. 17(old) 381(new), Khesra no.1304 (Old)1484(new) Circle- Khanpur, P.S.- Khanpur, District- Samastipur as the land is a private raiyati land having absolute right, title and interest of petitioner over the said land. (iii) To issue other order/orders/direction to the ends of justice."

2. Mr. Raja Ram Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ritesh Suman, learned AC to SC-13 appearing for the State-Respondents are present and they are heard.

3. It is submitted by the petitioner's counsel that, upon the petitioner's land measuring 33 decimals situated in MaujaRanjitpur, Thana No. 212, pertaining to Khata No. 17 (Old) / 381 (New), Khesra No. 1304 (Old) / 1484 (New), Circle-Khanpur, District-Samastipur, construction of a Panchayat Bhawan has been started and the same was challenged by the petitioner by way of CWJC No. 2360 of 2025, in which the petitioner was directed to file a fresh representation before Respondent No. 5, Collector, Samastipur. The petitioner filed a fresh representation in light of that order, upon which the impugned order dated 05.07.2025 has

Patna High Court CWJC No.16191 of 2025(2) dt.04-11-2025 3/3 been passed, in which the petitioner's claim over his land has been rejected by the Collector, Samastipur, mainly considering that the land in question has been entered in the RS Khatiyan in the name of "Anawad Bihar Sarkar," while the said land had earlier been entered in the name of the legal heirs of the petitioner's vendor in the CS Khatiyan, and the same was purchased by the petitioner. All these facts were not appreciated by the Collector, Samastipur.

4. After having gone through the impugned order as well as the averments made in this petition, this Court finds that the issue raised by the petitioner concerning his so-called title to the land in question requires evidences from both sides for which the best forum is Civil Court. At this stage, this Court is not persuaded to invoke its writ jurisdiction to settle the said issue. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with giving liberty to the petitioner to file a civil suit before the competent Civil Court for redressal of his grievance and the time spent by the petitioner in this writ petition shall be excluded while computing the period of limitation.

(Shailendra Singh, J) maynaz/- U