Anil Kumar Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19696 of 2025 ====================================================== Anil Kumar Chaudhary son of Late Bhagwan Chaudhary, resident of Bharatkhand, P.S.-Parwatta, District-Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.
Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue and land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3.
The District Magistrate-Cum-Collector, Purnia. 4.
The District Magistrate-Cum-Collector, Khagaria. 5.
The Additional Collector Ceiling, Purnia.
6.
The Additional Collector, Khagaria.
7.
The Deputy Collector, Khagaria.
8.
Circle Officer, Parbatta, District-Khagaria.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Brij Nandad Prasad, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr.Bijay Bhushan Prasad, AC to SC-13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 31-03-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the following relief/s:
(i) to issue and appropriate read, preferably in the nature of prohibition, restraining the respondent authorities from issuing any rent receipt in favour of any person with regard
2/4 to the land which was subject matter of land selling surplus land acquisition distribution case number 01 of 1989-90;
(ii) to hold and declare that the Parcha issued to the beneficiaries, in land selling surplus land distribution case number 01 of 1989-90, since have been cancelled as such the Parcha holders have no legal right to stake any claim over the land settled in their favour earlier;
(iii) to grant any other relief(s) as may be deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case..
3. The petitioner is a land holder and a Ceiling Case No. 10 of 1991-92 was initiated against the family and ultimately culminated into the release of the land in question as detailed out in paragraph-06 as under:
Mouza Khata no. Plot no. Area in Acre Land belong to Bhangaha 109 678 7.32 Santosh Kr. Singh Tulla 679 1.08 of Jamunia Tole 8.40 P.S. Maner Rupouli 1074 3176 2.03 Saryug Rai of 227 2.12 Rupouli P.S.
Banmankhi not known.
3/4
4. The contention is that in the meantime, some landless were issued 'Purchas' but as the story unfolds, it continued only against two of them who got an order from the competent Court, for the rest 8, admittedly Jamabandi has been cancelled.
5. The contention is that still rent receipt is/are issued against them forcing him to move before the Court.
6. The State has filed affidavit and has denied the said claim of the petitioner and the contention is that Jamabandi has been cancelled with regard to all the 'Parcha' holders.
7. This Court has gone through the facts of the case and the submissions of the parties, the claim of the petitioner that the rent receipts are still being issued is bereft of any supporting documents. Worse, though the claim is that the rent receipts are issued to the eight of the Purchas holders, none of them have been made party respondents in the present case who can come forward and accept/refute the claim. The contention thus is only based on surmises and conjectures.
8. The petitioner concedes that no information whatsoever has been taken by him under Right to Information from the concerned circle office. The submission is that he shall be seeking RTI information regarding the land in question to
4/4 ascertain whether parchas have been cancelled or not.
10. Granting said liberty and without commenting further on the merit of the case, the writ petition is disposed of. (Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U