Patna High Court
Maya DeviversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court disposed the writ petition, directing the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority with the existing orders rather than issuing a direct writ for possession.
Summary
Maya Devi filed a writ petition seeking a court order directing various state authorities to deliver possession of a disputed land to her, based on a 5 May 2017 order of the Public Grievance Redressal Officer. The petitioner argued that the authorities had already taken steps, as evidenced by affidavits from the Circle Officer and Collector, and that a court directive would enable her to approach the appropriate authority for the issuance of a correction slip under the Bihar Mutation Act, 2011. The State counsel raised no objection. The Court held that it could not directly compel the authorities to grant possession but allowed the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority with the existing favorable orders. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed, with the observation that any further petition must be heard on its merits after all parties are heard. The decision essentially directs the petitioner to pursue the matter administratively rather than through further judicial intervention.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can issue a writ directing the respondent authorities to deliver possession of the land to the petitioner pursuant to the earlier order of the Public Grievance Redressal Officer.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a correction slip under the Bihar Mutation Act, 2011 without further delay.
Subjects
- civil writ jurisdiction
- possession
- land mutation
- public grievance redressal
- Bihar land reforms
- correction slip
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1019 of 2019
======================================================
Maya Devi Wife of Niranjan Prasad Gupta Resident of Village- Deo (Sitalal
Gali), P.S. Deo, District- Aurangabad, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. District Magistrate, Aurangabad.
3. Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Aurangabad.
4. Public Grievance Redressal Officer, Aurangabad.
5. Station House Officer, Deo, District- Aurangabad.
6. Anchal Adhikari, Deo, District- Aurangabad.
7. Randhir Singh Son of Late Jiv Rakhan Prasad Singh Resident of Village
Bedhani, P.S. Deo, District- Aurangabad.
8. Surajmal Prasad Son of Late Janaki Sao Resident of Village Deo, P.S. Deo,
District- Aurangabad.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jitendra Prasad Singh, Sr. Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Nutan Sahay, AAG-12
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
6 03-02-2026 Heard Mr. Jitendra Prasad Singh, learned Senior counsel
for the petitioner and Mrs. Nutan Sahay, learned State Counsel.
2. The present application has been preferred:
for issuance of an appropriate Writ or
Writs directing the respondent-authorities to
deliver the possession of the land in question in
favour of petitioner pursuant to the order dated
05.05.2017 passed by the Public Grievance
Redressal Officer, Aurangabad and further
respondent no. 6-Anchal Adhikari may be
directed to issue correction slip in favour of
Patna High Court CWJC No.1019 of 2019(6) dt.03-02-2026
2/2
petitioner under the provisions of the Bihar
Mutation Act, 2011 without further delay and/or
to grant any other relief/reliefs for which the
petitioner is legally entitled in the facts and
circumstances of the case.
3. Though the affidavit have come on behalf of the Circle
Officer, Deo as also the Collector, Aurangabad showing that they
have taken appropriate steps.
4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that
it will suffice if she is allowed to approach the appropriate authority
along with this order so that they can take decision in the matter.
5. Learned State Counsel has no grievance.
6. In that background, the writ petition is disposed of
allowing the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority along
with all the orders that have come in her favour and if such petition is
preferred, naturally, the same has to be taken to its logical conclusion
after noticing/hearing all the concerned parties.
7. The writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid
observation.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Vijay Singh/-
U
Checking your session…