Patna High Court
Raj Aryan @ Aryan RajversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The High Court stayed the D.C.L.R.'s order and directed the Commissioner, Darbhanga Division, to dispose of the pending appeal within three months, holding that the D.C.L.R. lacked jurisdiction to decide the substantive rights in the joint family property.
Summary
The petitioner, Raj Aryan, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 06-07-2023 passed by the Deputy Collector Land Revenue (D.C.L.R.) in a land dispute case, which directed measurement of the disputed land and threatened dispossession if encroachment was found. The petitioner contended that the land in question is joint family property, originally purchased by his grandfather for his aunt (respondent no. 7) and his mother, and argued that the D.C.L.R. lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate rights, title, and possession in such a family property. The court noted that the petitioner has already appealed the D.C.L.R.'s order before the Commissioner, Darbhanga (BLDR Appeal No. 30 of 2023). Accordingly, the High Court stayed the impugned order pending the outcome of the appeal and directed the Commissioner to dispose of the appeal within three months, providing an opportunity of hearing to all parties. The court further ordered that no dispossession action be taken against the petitioner until the appeal is finally decided.
Issues considered
- Whether the D.C.L.R. has jurisdiction to determine right, title, and possession in a joint family property.
- Whether the order directing measurement and potential dispossession is valid pending an appeal.
- Whether the stay of the D.C.L.R.'s order is appropriate pending the appellate decision.
Subjects
- joint family property
- jurisdiction
- land dispute resolution
- stay of order
- appeal
- dispossession
- measurement
- right title possession
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13949 of 2024
======================================================
Raj Aryan @ Aryan Raj Son of Late Bidhi Pratap Singh, resident of Village
and P.O., P.S.-Hasanpur, District-Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Bihar, Patna.
2. Commissioner, Darbhanga.
3. District Magistrate, Samastipur.
4. Sub-Divisional Officer Rosera, District Samastipur.
5. Deputy Collector Land Reveue (DCLR) Rosera, District Samastipur.
6. Circle Officer Hasanpur, District Samastipur.
7. Saroj Devi, Wife of Sri Bhagwan Prasad Singh, Resident of House No. 10
Nirala Nagar, P.o and PS-Digha, District-Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Diwakar Prasad Singh
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Government Pleader 23
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
4 10-02-2026 1. Heard the parties.
2. The present writ application has been filed against the
order dated 06.07.2023 passed by learned D.C.L.R., Rosera in
Land Dispute Resolution Case No. 12 of 2022-23 by which he
has directed for measurement of the disputed property and
further directed that if the petitioner is found having encroached
upon the property of the respondent no. 7, steps for
dispossession of the petitioner shall be taken. A Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court taking note of the submission of the parties
have passed interim order dated 04.08.2025 whereby the order
Patna High Court CWJC No.13949 of 2024(4) dt.10-02-2026
2/3
dated 06.07.2023 passed by D.C.L.R. in Land Dispute
Resolution Case No. 12 of 2022-23 has been stayed till the writ
petition is finally adjudicated by this Court.
3. The respondent no. 7 is the own Aunt of the petitioner. In
a nutshell the case of the petitioner is that while the respondent
no. 7 was aged about eleven years the subject land was
purchased in her name by the grand father of the petitioner from
joint family fund. Another piece of land was also purchased by
the grand father of the petitioner in the name of petitioner’s
mother. The case is not plain and simple of measurement and
removal of encroachment, rather the dispute between the parties
involved is of right, title and possession upon joint family
property.
4. The submission is that exercise of jurisdiction by the
D.C.L.R., Rosera is in violation of the provisions of law
inasmuch the D.C.L.R. cannot enter into the question of right,
title and interest in a joint family property of the parties.
5. It has been informed by the petitioner that the petitioner
has filed an Appeal before the Commissioner, Darbhanga
Division , Darbhanga bearing BLDR Appeal No. 30 of 2023.
6. Considering the fact that the impugned order dated
06.07.2023 passed by the D.C.L.R., Rosera, District: Samastipur
Patna High Court CWJC No.13949 of 2024(4) dt.10-02-2026
3/3
has been challenged in the Appeal by the petitioner, accordingly
this writ petition is disposed with a direction to the
Commissioner, Darbhanga Division, Darbhanga to dispose the
Appeal filed by the petitioner within a period of three months
from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order after
giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as private
respondent no. 7 or any other concerned person in accordance
with law by a reasoned and speaking order.
7. It is made clear that till the BLDR Appeal No. 30 of 2023
is finally decided by the Commissioner, Darbhanga Division,
the authorities of the State shall not take any action against the
petitioner for his dispossession from the property in dispute.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
praful/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.