Patna High Court
Gita DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The 2018 notification cancels the Chakbandi scheme in Kishanganj, rendering the 1986 and 1987 orders ineffective, and the writ petition is therefore disposed of.
Summary
The petitioners, Gita Devi and Arun Kumar Ray, sought to quash the orders dated 19‑December‑1986 and 13‑May‑1987 issued by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Kishanganj, and the subsequent Chakbandi Khatiya, alleging that the land in question belonged to the estate of Late Sahat Lal and that the orders were based on an application filed by the late Gamak Lal. They contended that the State Government's Notification No. 54 dated 19‑January‑2018 cancelled the Chakbandi scheme in 21 districts, including Kishanganj, rendering the earlier orders ineffective. The petitioners argued that although a revision remedy under Section 35 of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 existed, it was unavailable because the scheme itself had been withdrawn. The State argued that the petitioners could still seek revision before the Director of Consolidation, Bihar. The Court held that the 2018 notification unequivocally cancelled the Chakbandi scheme in Kishanganj, thereby nullifying the 1986 and 1987 orders and obviating any further remedy. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the orders of 19‑December‑1986 and 13‑May‑1987 and the resulting Chakbandi Khatiya can be set aside in view of the 2018 notification cancelling the Chakbandi scheme in Kishanganj.
- Whether the petitioners have any alternative remedy, such as a revision under Section 35 of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Chakbandi scheme
- Consolidation of holdings
- Writ of certiorari
- Section 35
- Bihar land law
- Notification cancellation
- Revision remedy
- Land rights
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1166 of 2026
======================================================
1. Gita Devi, wife of Mahendra Kumar Harijan, resident of village-
Haruwadanga, P.S.- Dighal Bank, Distt. - Kishanganj.
2. Arun Kumar Ray, Son of Late Sahat Lal Hadi @ Sahat Lal Ray, resident of
Village- Chahatpur, P.S. - Garbhandanga, Distt. - Kishanganj.
... ... Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Land and
Revenue, Patna.
2. The Director, Consolidation, Bihar at Patna.
3. The Deputy Director, Consolidation, Kishanganj, Bihar.
4. The Consolidation Officer, Kishanganj, Bihar.
5. Vishnu Lal Harijan, Son of Late Gamak Lal Harijan, resident of village-
Chahatpur, P.S.- Garbhandanga, Distt. - Kishanganj.
6. Ajay Kumar Ray, Son of Late Gamak Lal Harijan, resident of village-
Chahatpur, P.S.- Garbhandanga, Distt. - Kishanganj.
7. Vijay Kumar Ray, Son of Late Gamak Lal Harijan, resident of Village-
Chahatpur, P.S.- Garbhandanga, Distt. - Kishanganj.
8. Narayan Harijan, Son of Late Gamak Lal Harijan, resident of Village-
Chahatpur, P.S.- Garbhandanga, Distt. - Kishanganj.
9. Sanjay Kumar Harijan, Son of Late Gamak La Harijan, resident of Village-
Chahatpur, P.S.- Garbhandanga, Distt. - Kishanganj.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pranav Kumar, Advocate.
Mr. Rajeev Ranjan No.II, Advocate.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Madanjeet Kumar, GP-20.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 03-02-2026
Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
2. The petitioners in paragraph no. 1 of the present
writ petition have sought, inter alia, following relief(s), which is
reproduced hereinafter:-
Patna High Court CWJC No.1166 of 2026 dt.03-02-2026
2/4
“1. That this application is directed for
issuance of writ in the nature of Certiorari / any other
appropriate writ/order/direction for quashing the order
dated 19/12/1986 and 13/05/1987 passed by the Deputy
Director, Consolidation, Kishanganj in case no.1012/1979
and also the Chakbandi Khatiya prepared on basis of such
orders whereby and where under the correction slip has
been issued in favor of the private respondents with respect
to the plots which were not the subject matter of the
aforesaid case initiated on the application dated 22/02/79
filed by the late Gamak Lal father of private respondents.
At the very outset it is stated that Late Gamak
Lal was one son out of 7 off- spring of Late Sahat Lal who
had acquired 3 acre 28 decimal land and all of them have
equal right in the property of Late Sahat Lal but the
Chakbandi Khatiyan has been prepared in favor of father of
private respondents.”
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submitted that the case of the petitioners is covered
by the decision of the State Government taken vide Notification
No. 54 dated 19.01.2018, by which chakbandi scheme has been
cancelled / quashed. Petitioners are aggrieved by the orders
dated 19.12.1986 and 13.05.1987 passed by the Deputy
Director, Consolidation, Kishanganj in Case No. 1012/1979.
Learned counsel admits that against the said orders, remedy of
revision is available before the Director, Consolidation, Bihar
under Section 35 of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and
Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to
as “Act, 1956). He submits that he is ready to avail such remedy,
but it will be contrary to the decision of the State Government
contained in Notification No. 54 dated 19.01.2018, by which
chakbandi scheme itself has been quashed in respect of 21
Patna High Court CWJC No.1166 of 2026 dt.03-02-2026
3/4
districts notified in the said notification and in respect of
remaining districts, no step has been taken to implement the said
scheme during the relevant period. He further submitted that
inaction on the part of the revenue authorities and red tapism
having been noticed by the State Government adopted by the
chakbandi officers call for withdrawal of the said scheme by the
State Government. Under such circumstances, learned counsel
seeks to avail appropriate remedy before the competent civil
court.
4. Per contra, Mr. Madanjeet Singh, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the State submitted that by the
Notification No. 54 dated 19.01.2018, Chakbandi Scheme has
been cancelled in respect of 21 district and Kishanganj is also
among the 21 districts. The petitioners have efficacious remedy,
if they are aggrieved, by the orders dated 9.12.1986 and
13.05.1987 passed by the Deputy Director, Consolidation,
Kishanganj in Case No. 1012/1979, before the Director,
Consolidation, Bihar.
5. Heard the parties.
6. I find that the Notification No. 54 dated 19.01.2018
is self explanatory by which the continuation of Chakbandi
Yojna has been cancelled in respect of the districts named in the
Patna High Court CWJC No.1166 of 2026 dt.03-02-2026
4/4
notification by the State Government. In respect of the district
Kishanganj also, chakbandi is cancelled which renders the
orders dated 9.12.1986 and 13.05.1987 ineffective. The question
of availing remedy before the Director, Consolidation, Bihar
also don’t arise in light of the Notification No. 54 dated
19.01.2018.
7. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition
stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
mantreshwar/-
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE N.A.
Uploading Date 12.02.2026
Transmission Date N.A.
Checking your session…