Patna High Court
Rajendra MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The petition was disposed without granting mandamus, directing the petitioner to approach the Collector with evidence of his entitlement.
Summary
The petitioner, Rajendra Mahto, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the revenue authorities to issue a Vasgit Parcha, restore the Jamabandi, and issue a land receipt in his name, claiming he is a privileged landless person. The petitioner was to approach the Collector, Begusarai, to substantiate his claim. The State counsel did not file an affidavit, and the court noted that imposing costs would delay disposal. The High Court disposed of the petition, directing the petitioner to present documents before the Collector to prove that the Circle Officer's assertion that he is not landless is erroneous. No reliefs were granted by the court; the petitioner was left to seek redress through the administrative channel.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to issuance or re‑issuance of a Vasgit Parcha as a privileged person.
- Whether the court should direct restoration of the Jamabandi in the petitioner’s name.
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued against the revenue authorities in the present facts.
Subjects
- land revenue
- Vasgit Parcha
- Jamabandi
- mandamus
- writ petition
- landless person
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14269 of 2019
======================================================
Rajendra Mahto Son of Late Raghuvir Mahto Resident of Dusaina Diyara,
P.S. Baliya Circle Baliya, District Begusarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Divisional Commissioner, Bihar
4. The District Magistrate, Begusarai.
5. The Circle Officer, Baliya Circle, Baliya.
6. The Circle Officer, Amin, Baliya.
7. Prince Kumar Son of Late Boldeo Mahto Residence of Village Kamalpur,
PS Baliya District Begusarai.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anuj Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sajid Salim Khan (Sc25)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
5 03-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
following relief/s:
(i) for issuance of Mandamus or any other
appropriate writ / writs order / orders
direction /direction upon the respondent/
respondents concerned for the following
relief reliefs: order indulgence of this
Hon'ble High Court following relief/s:
Patna High Court CWJC No.14269 of 2019(5) dt.03-02-2026
2/3
(i) to direct the respondent concerned to
issue/ reissue Vasgit Parcha in the name of
the petitioner being him privilege person;
(ii) for creation restoration of Jamabandi by
the respondent (S) concerned against the
name of the petitioner;
(iii) for issuance of land receipt in the name
of the petitioner after creation /restoration of
Jamabandi in the name of the petitioner
(iv) for any other relief (S) for which the
petitioner in entitled in the eyes of Law in
the facts and circumstance of this case.
3. After some argument, learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that he shall be approaching the respondent
no.4, the Collector, Begusarai for the redressal of the grievance
and shall try to show the bona fide that he is a landless person.
4. Learned State counsel has not filed any affidavit as
usual and in that background, keeping the same pending and
imposing cost will only delay the disposal of the writ petition.
5. In that background, the writ petition is disposed of
allowing the petitioner to agitate the matter before the Collector,
Begusarai and he will have to convince with the
Patna High Court CWJC No.14269 of 2019(5) dt.03-02-2026
3/3
documents/affidavit to show that the assertion of the Circle
Officer, Balia, Begusarai that he is not a landless person is
erroneous and as such he is entitled for relief.
6. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid
observation.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/-
U
Checking your session…