← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/18338/2018disposed

Jagata Nand Pathak v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2025-09-22Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18338 of 2018 ====================================================== Jagata Nand Pathak S/o Late Ram Naresh Pathak, Resident of VillageMahadipur, P.O.- Mathurapur, P.S.- Guraru, District- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Addl. Collector Revenue, Gaya, District- Gaya. 3.

The D.C.L.R., Sherghati, P.S.- Sherghati, District- Gaya. 4.

The Circle Officer, Bankey Bazar, P.O.- Bankey Bazar, P.S.- Bankey Bazar, District- Gaya.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Nagendra Rai, Advocate Mr.Basant Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, GP-14 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 22-09-2025 Heard Mr. Nagendra Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, learned GP-14.

2. The present petition has been preferred for the following relief/s:

(I) for issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction in the nature of mandamus to set aside the order dated 10.02.2018 passed by Addl. Collector (Revenue) Gaya, in Mutation Cancellation Case No. 15/2013-14, by which the learned Addl. Collector (Revenue) Gaya pleased to cancel the Jamabandi No. 31(1)/2009-10,

Patna High Court CWJC No.18338 of 2018(4) dt.22-09-2025 2/3 which was created in the name of the petitioner and his brothers;

(ii) to direct the respondent authorities not to act as per the said order passed by the Addl. Collector (Revenue) Gaya, till the disposal of this writ application;

(iii) to grant any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is entitled to in the fact and circumstances of the case.

3. Learned State counsel submits that the order has been passed by Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Gaya and the petitioner ought to have approached the appropriate superior authority/forum for the redressal of the grievance.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner after some argument submits that he shall be approaching the said authority but there has been delay as the petitioner was pursuing the matter before this Court for last seven years.

5. Considering the submissions of the parties, instead of keeping the writ petition pending, it is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority in next four weeks and if the same is filed, the concerned authority shall be taking note of the fact that the petitioner was pursuing

Patna High Court CWJC No.18338 of 2018(4) dt.22-09-2025 3/3 the matter before this Court for last seven years while dealing with the limitation petition.

6. It is further expected that the matter will be taken to its logical conclusion at an earliest.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U