Ajay Kumar Verma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.389 of 2024 ====================================================== Ajay Kumar Verma, Son of Late Harinandan Prasad Sinha, Resident of Mohalla Rajgir Kund, P.S.- Rajgir, District- Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar .

2.

The District Magistrate, Nalanda.

3.

The Additional Collector, (Revenue) Nalanda District- Nalanda. 4.

The Sub-Division Officer, Rajgir, District- Nalanda. 5.

The Circle Officer, Rajgir, District- Nalanda, Rajgir. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mrs.Namrata Mishra, Sr. Advocate Mr.Ratanakar Jha, Advocate Mr.Anamika Kumari, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Mahtab Alam, AC to SC-20 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR ORAL ORDER 24-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. In the instant writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):

"(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order, direction to restrain the Circle Officer Rajgir District - Nalanda (Respondent No.5) from taking any action against petitioner's long peaceful possession of the lands of Khata No. 332, Plot No. 5060, area 0.01/2 Decimals of Mauza Rajgir, P.S. Rajgir, District- Nalanda in the name of

Patna High Court CWJC No.389 of 2024(10) dt.24-07-2026 2/3 encroachment of Govt. land.

(ii) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order, direction that without disposal of show cause reply filed on behalf of petitioner in compliance of order dated 26.08.1999 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 3139 of 1988, before Circle Officer, Rajgir is not only a contempt but also amount to arbitrary actions of the respondent No.5.

(iii) For issuance of an appropriate writ, order, direction granting any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is found entitled."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has filed representation before the Circle Officer, Rajgir for necessary action and disposal of the dispute, but in the said representation no order has been passed by the C.O. She further submits that the Circle Officer, Rajgir is trying to disposess the petitioner from the land in question.

4. Learned counsel for the State has drawn attention of this Court towards paragraph No.5 of the supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 and submits that as per the records of the present case, there is no encroachment proceeding pending against the petitioner.

Patna High Court CWJC No.389 of 2024(10) dt.24-07-2026 3/3

5. Having heard the parties and taking into account the fact that there is no such encroachment proceeding pending against the petitioner, hence, the issue of dispossession of petitioner does not arise. It is expected that the Authorities concerned will follow the due process of law before dispossessing the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the present Writ petition stands disposed of.

(Alok Kumar, J) manish/- U