Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Sumeshwar PrasadversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

A lessee who is not the owner cannot unilaterally convert agricultural land to non‑agricultural use; such conversion requires the owner's consent, and the DCLR’s order rejecting the application is upheld.

Summary

The petitioner, a lessee, applied under Section 5 of the Bihar Agricultural Land (Conversion for Non‑Agriculture Purposes) Act, 2010 to convert his lease‑hold agricultural land to non‑agricultural use. The Deputy Collector Land Reforms rejected the application, holding that the petitioner was not the owner and lacked the landowner’s consent. The petitioner challenged the order, arguing the rejection was arbitrary and based on a vague nuisance ground. The State defended the order, stating the lease agreement did not grant conversion rights to the lessee. The Court examined the definitions of “occupier” and “owner” in the Act and held that a lessee cannot alter the land’s classification without the owner’s consent. Consequently, the Court upheld the DCLR’s order and dismissed the writ petition, directing the petitioner to seek fresh permission from the landowner if he wishes to re‑apply.

Issues considered

  • Can a lessee (occupier) seek conversion of agricultural land to non‑agricultural use under the Bihar Agricultural Land (Conversion for Non‑Agriculture Purposes) Act, 2010 without the landowner’s consent?
  • Is the Deputy Collector’s order rejecting the conversion application legally valid?
  • How are the terms ‘owner’ and ‘occupier’ to be interpreted under the Act?

Subjects

  • land conversion
  • leasehold
  • agricultural land
  • non‑agricultural use
  • occupier vs owner
  • Bihar Agricultural Land Act
  • writ petition
  • quashing order

Judgment

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                    Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13762 of 2021
     ======================================================
     Sumeshwar Prasad son of Kapileshwar Prasad resident of Village- Gopalganj,
     P.S.- Islampur, District- Nalanda.

                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                         Versus
1.   The State of Bihar
2.   The District Magistrate, Nalanda, Biharsharif.
3.   The Sub- Divisional Officer, Hilsa, Nalanda.
4.   The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Hilsa Nalanda.
5.   The Circle Officer, Parbalpur Block, Nalanda.

                                               ... ... Respondent/s
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Petitioner/s   :       Mr.Abhinay Raj, Advocate.
     For the Respondent/s   :       Mr.Arif Daula Siddiqui, AC to SC-25.
     ======================================================
     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
                      ORAL JUDGMENT

      Date : 06-01-2026

                      Heard Mr. Abhinay Raj, learned counsel appearing

      on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Arif Daula Siddiqui, learned

      counsel for the State.

                      2. The petitioner in paragraph no. 1 of the present

      writ petition has sought, inter alia, following relief(s), which is

      reproduced hereinafter:-

                              “1. That this writ application is being filed for
                      issuance of an appropriate writ for quashing of order
                      contained in Memo No. 130 dated 24.02.2020 issued by the
                      Deputy Collector, Hilsa, Nalanda, whereby the application
                      of the petitioner for conversion of his land from agricultural
                      to non-agricultural use has been rejected. A further
                      direction be issued calling upon the respondent to bring on
                      record the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer,
                      Hilsa, as referred to in the Memo No. 130 dated 24.02.2020
                      and the same be quashed.”
Patna High Court CWJC No.13762 of 2021 dt.06-01-2026
                                           2/5




                         3. Mr. Abhinay Raj, learned counsel appearing on

         behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had made

         an application under Section 5 of the Bihar Agricultural Land

         (Conversion        for    Non-Agriculture     Purposes)   Act,   2010

         (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 2010”) in requisite Form No.3

         giving all the details before the competent authority notified

         under the Act, 2010 for conversion of his land from agricultural

         to non-agricultural purpose. Learned counsel submitted that

         from the order impugned dated 24.02.2020 as contained in

         Annexure-6 passed by the Deputy Collector Land Reforms,

         Hilsa, Nalanda (hereinafter referred to as “DCLR”), no reason

         has been assigned, why his application has been rejected. He

         points out that only ground of rejection is that if the land is

         converted for non-agricultural purpose, the same will create

         nuisance in the area. It is submitted that without any evidence or

         taking into consideration of any criminal activities or any report

         obtained from the local police on the basis of inquiry, the order

         cannot sustain. On these basis, learned counsel submitted that

         the order is required to be set aside and quashed having passed

         without application of mind.

                         4. Per contra, Mr. Arif Daula Siddiqui, learned

         counsel appearing on behalf of the State submitted that a
Patna High Court CWJC No.13762 of 2021 dt.06-01-2026
                                           3/5




         reasoned order has been passed as contained in Memo No. 130

         dated 24.02.2020 by the DCLR assigning reason that the land

         for which the petitioner has made an application for conversion

         from agricultural to non-agricultural, he has taken the aforesaid

         land on lease and without consent or any application made by

         the original landholder, the DCLR has rightly rejected the

         application of the petitioner and as such the order is supported

         by the valid reasons and requires no interference by this Court.

                         5. Heard the parties.

                         6. The petitioner made an application before the

         competent authority for conversion of his lease hold land from

         agricultural to non-agricultural purpose on 23.07.2018 and

         finally the said application was disposed of by the DCLR vide

         reasoned order dated 24.02.2020 contained in Memo No. 130

         rejecting the application of the petitioner on the ground that the

         petitioner is not the owner of the land rather he is the lessee.

         Petitioner has brought on record registered lease agreement

         dated 18.07.2018 duly executed by Shri Ravindra Sharma, the

         original landholder.

                         7. I have perused the terms and conditions of the

         lease agreement which don’t grant any right to the petitioner to

         change the very nature of the land which has been leased out to
Patna High Court CWJC No.13762 of 2021 dt.06-01-2026
                                           4/5




         the petitioner nor the agreement binds the petitioner to make

         payment of the rent to the Revenue Authority on behalf of the

         lessor – the original landholder.

                         8. The Act, 2010 defines Occupier and Owner as

         under:

                         (j) “Occupier” includes
                                 (i) any person for the time being paying or liable to
                         pay the rent, or any portion of the rent, for the land or, for
                         the structure constructed thereon;
                                 (ii) a rent free occupant;
                         (k) "Owner" includes any person for the time being
                         receiving or entitled to receive, whether on his own
                         account, or as an agent, trustee, guardian, manager or
                         receiver, for another person, or for any religious,
                         educational or charitable purpose, rent or profits for the
                         agriculture land or for the structure constructed on such
                         land and includes the following to whom the land have been
                         leased out by the State Government or the Central
                         Government:
                         (i) A lessee, if the land has been leased out by the
                         Government for any non- agriculture purpose deriving
                         income therefrom.
                         (ii) a Local Authority, if the land is vested in the Local
                         Authority and used for any non-agriculture purpose
                         deriving income therefrom.

                         9. No doubt, the petitioner has applied for

         conversion of the agricultural land on the basis of him being the

         occupier arising out of the lease agreement, which binds him

         with the terms and conditions of the contract. The authority

         cannot change the nature of the land at the instance of the

         lessee, the petitioner of the present case.

                         10. In view of the clear differentiation between the

         occupier and the owner of the land, I am not inclined to interfere
            Patna High Court CWJC No.13762 of 2021 dt.06-01-2026
                                                       5/5




                     with the order passed by the DCLR dated 24.02.2020, as

                     contained in Memo No. 130 (Annexure-6).

                                     11. If the petitioner intends to apply afresh, he may

                     do so with the consent of the owner of the land.

                                     12. The writ application, accordingly, stands

                     disposed of.


                                                             (Purnendu Singh, J)


mantreshwar/-
AFR/NAFR               NAFR
CAV DATE               NA
Uploading Date         08.01.2026
Transmission Date      NA


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.