Patna High Court

Gita MandalversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 20 January 2026
Disposal: DISMISSED
Bench: THE CHIEF JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH

Holding

The court held that the decision to shift the site complied with the applicable guidelines and there was no illegality or arbitrariness, therefore the writ petition is dismissed.

Summary

The petitioners, a group of Gram Panchayat officials, filed a public interest litigation seeking to quash Letter No. 719 dated 02.07.2024 and a subsequent tender for constructing a Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan at a site they claimed was unsuitable and contrary to the Gram Sabha resolution and state guidelines. They alleged that the authorities acted arbitrarily, exceeded their discretionary powers, and violated Article 14 of the Constitution. The respondents contended that the selected site met the minimum 50-decimal land requirement, complied with the 30.08.2022 departmental notification, and that the earlier site lacked sufficient land, justifying the change. The Court examined precedents on judicial review of policy decisions and held that courts may intervene only for manifest illegality, arbitrariness, or violation of fundamental rights, not for mere policy disagreements. Finding no illegality or mala‑fide intent in the authorities' decision, the Court dismissed the writ petition.

Issues considered

Whether the decision to change the site of the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan and issue Letter No. 719 is arbitrary, illegal, or violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.
Whether the respondents exceeded their statutory or discretionary powers in selecting the land contrary to the Panchayati Raj Department guidelines.
Whether the S.B.D. Tender No. 33/2024‑25 for construction of the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan can be quashed.
Whether the court can interfere with a governmental policy decision absent clear illegality or violation of fundamental rights.

Subjects

public interest litigation
Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan
land acquisition
administrative discretion
Article 14
judicial review
policy decision
Panchayati Raj
writ petition
certiorari
mandamus

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15426 of 2025
======================================================
1. Gita Mandal Son of Mahaveer Mandal, Resident of Village Harla, Kundri
Son Kurha Harla, P.O.-Amarath, Block - Jamui, P.S. - Jamui, District -
Jamui, Bihar, being in the capacity of the present Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat
Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block-Jamui, District-Jamui.
2. Jamuna Thakur, S/o Devi Thakur, R/o Village- Sankurha (Baharayan), P.S.-
Jamui, District- Jamui being in the Capacity of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat
Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block - Jamui, District- Jamui.
3. Vinita Devi, W/o Sakindra Kumar, R/o Village-Sitarampur, P.S- Jamui
District- Jamui, being in the capacity of ward Panch, ward no.-03, Gram
Panchayat Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block- Jamui, District-Jamui.
4. Chanda Devi, W/o Mukesh Singh, R/o Village Ganesh nawada, P.S- Jamui,
Dist- Jamui, being in the capacity of Ward Panch, ward no.08 Gram
panchayat Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block Jamui, Distirct- Jamui.
5. Pramila Devi, W/o Nageshwar Mandal, R/o Village Harla, P.S-Jamui,
District- Jamui, being in the capacity of Ward Panch, ward no.-13 Block-
Jamui, District-Jamui.
6. Manju Devi, W/o Naresh Mandal, Village-Harla, P.S- Jamui, Dist- Jamui,
being in the capacity of ward Panch, ward No.-14 Gram panchayat Raj
Kundri, Sankurha Block-Jamui, Dist- Jamui.
7. Gajo Manjh, S/o Late Gopal Manjhi, Resident of Village Kharsari, P.S-
Jamui, District- Jamui being in the capacity of Ward Member, ward no.02,
Gram Panchayat Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block- Jamui, District - Jamui.
8. Ajay Pawan, S/o Ruso Paswan, R/o Village- Ganesh Nawada, P.S-Jamui,
District- Jamui, being in the capacity of Ward Member, ward no.08 Gram
Panchayat Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block-Jamui, District - Jamui.
9. Manju Devi, W/o Shyam Ravidas, Village- Kundri P.S- Jamui, District-
Jamui, being in the Capacity of Ward Member, Ward No.09 Gram Panchayat
Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block - Jamui, District - Jamui.
10. Ritu Devi, W/o-Mannu Singh, R/o-Village - Kundri, P.S- Jamui, District-
Jamui being in the capacity of Ward Member Ward no.10, Gram Panchayat
Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block-Jamui, District-Jamui.
11. Bibha Devi, W/o Pankaj Ram, R/o Village- Sankurha (Baharain) P.S- Jamui,
Dist- Jamui, being in the capacity of Ward Member, Ward no.11, Gram
Panchayat Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block-Jamui, Dist- Jamui.
12. Ganita Devi, W/o Ramwadan Paswan, R/o Village-Harla, P.S-Jamui, District
Jamui, being in the capacity of Ward Member, Ward no.13, Gram Panchayat
Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block-Jamui, District - Jamui.
13. Darogi Manjhi, S/o Yamuna Manjhi, R/o Village- Mahugay, P.S-Jamui,
District Jamui, being in the capacity of Ward Member, Ward no.15, Gram
Panchayat Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block-Jamui, District - Jamui.
14. Bhagirath Tanti, S/o Ram Chandra Tanti, R/o Village - Kharsari, P.S. -
Jamui, District - Jamui, being in the capacity of Ward Member, Ward no. 03,
Gram Panchayat Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block-Jamui, District - Jamui.
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
2/13

... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
3. The District Magistrate-cum- Collector, District-Jamui.
4. The District Panchayat Officer, District- Jamui.
5. The Sub Divisional Officer, Jamui, District- Jamui.
6. The Block Development Officer, Block- Jamui, District- Jamui.
7. The Block Panchayati Raj Officer, Block-Jamui, District-Jamui.
8. The Circle Officer, Jamui, District- Jamui.
9. The Executive Engineer, Building Division, District-Jamui.
10. Baijnath Nirman India Pvt. Ltd., Work Agency, Karyapalak Abhiyanta
Bhawan, Division, Jamui.
11. The Halka Karamchari, Kundri Sankurha Panchayat, Block and District-
Jamui.

... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Y.V Giri, Sr. Advocate
Ms.Shrishti Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Standing Counsel (11)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

Date : 20-01-2026

The writ petition has been filed in the nature of Public

Interest Litigation by the petitioners seeking for the following

reliefs:-

“To issue an appropriate writ, order, direction in the
nature of certiorari for quashing letter no. 719 dated
02.07.2024 issued by the District Magistrate, Jamui to
the Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayati Raj
Department, Government of Bihar, wherein land at
Mauza-Kundri - Sankurha, Harla, Thana no. 244,
Khata no. 333, Khesra no. 1173, comprising 50
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
3/13

decimals has been found sufficient for construction of
Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan in Gram Panchayat Raj
Kundri Sankurha of Block Jamui (Annexure-P/7, Pg.-
48).
(ii) To issue an appropriate writ, order,
direction in the nature of mandamus for commanding
the respondents to construct the Panchayat Sarkar
Bhawan on plot no. 2614, Khata No. 334, Mauza
Kundri-Sankurha-Harla, Anchal-Jamui, District-
Jamui.
(iii) To issue an appropriate writ, order,
direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the
SBD Tender no. 33/2024-2025 dated 17.02.2025 to
the extent of construction of Panchayat Sarkar
Bhawan in Kundri Sankurha Panchayat (Annexure-
P/8, Pg.-50).
(iv) To any other relief(s) for which the
petitioner appears to be found entitled to by the
Hon'ble Court.”

2. The main grounds taken for seeking relief is that the

decision dated 02.07.2024 is contrary to the guidelines issued

by the State of Bihar as also is contrary to the resolution of the

Gram Sabha dated 02.10.2022. Further, ground has been taken

that the respondents have assumed uninhibited discretionary

powers beyond what has been conferred on them and the

decision has been taken without considering the objections

raised and the recommendation made and therefore, the action

of the respondent authority is arbitrary, illegal and violative of

Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

3. The case of the petitioners is that the department of

Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar, Patna issued Letter No.
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
4/13

8354 dated 30.08.2022, whereby and whereunder it has been

mandated that a minimum of 50 decimal of land is required

for making Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan, accordingly a piece of

land was selected and recommended, which is 41.323 and the

same is a part of 2.61 Acre of land and it is purely a

Government land. It is the further case that since the land

measuring 2.61 Acres and 50 Decimals is available for

consideration and even otherwise the recommended land is

sufficient for construction in terms of the Notification No. 281

dated 08.01.2024 issued by the Panchayati Raj Department,

the petitioners are entitled to get the relief. It is the further

case of the petitioners that at the instance of a former Member

of Bihar Legislative Council, the District Magistrate, Jamui

recommended another place for construction of Panchayat

Sarkar Bhawan to the Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayati

Raj Department, Government of Bihar and it was jointly

signed by District Panchayati Raj Officer, Jamui, the Deputy

Development Commissioner, Jamui and District Magistrate

Jamui. The case of the petitioners further is that a tender dated

17.02.2025 was floated for construction of Panchayat Sarkar

Bhawan in Kundri Sankurha Panchayat and the new location

of the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan construction work was not
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
5/13

mentioned anywhere in the notification. Several,

representations were filed by the petitioners and other

villagers, however, the authority did not pay any heed to the

same.

It is the further case of the petitioners that under

extraneous condition a unilateral decision has been taken to

construct the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan at new site despite the

fact that only 5 decimals of land is available at the new site

and the said land is not at the village headquarter. The

authorities are bent upon to proceed with the construction

work. It is the further case of the petitioners that Panchayat

Sarkar Bhawan is the nucleus of the working of the Panchayti

Raj System and constructing the same at the headquarter and

the centre will ensure convenience and accessibility to not just

the residents of the village but also to the adjoining villages

and therefore, the decision taken is against the will of the

people and the guidelines promulgated have been blatantly

flouted with the respondents assuming uninhibited

discretionary power and such action contravenes the principle

of good governance and it is a facet of public interest. Since,

the decision taken by the respondent authority is palpably

unreasonable and colorable exercise of power violative of
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
6/13

Article 14 of the Constitution of India, the same should be

interferred with.

4. Upon issuance of notice the respondent nos. 3 to 8

have filed the counter affidavit, wherein, it is stated as

follows:-

“8. That, the office of the Collector, Jamui,
vide letter no. 33 dated 09-01-2024 has earlier sent
proposal for construction of the Panchayat Sarkar
Bhawan, in Kundri-Sankurha, thana no. 244, khata
no. 334, plot no. 2164, area 41.323 dismil of land
which is 'GairmajaruaAam' land and its nature is
'Dagar'. In this regard, report has been received from
the Circle Officer, Jamui.
9. That, the Circle Officer, Jamui, has further
sent enquiry report vide letter no. 713 dated 25-06-
2024wherein it has been stated that as per the survey
map the land pertaining to mauja-Kundri-Sankurha,
Harla, thana no. 244, khata no. 333, plot no. 1173, is
1.05 acre. However, in the gairmajarua register, only
5 dismil of land has been entered in the said plot. The
Circle Officer, Jamui, has further stated in the said
report dated 25-06-2024 that as per the survey map,
there is 50 dismil of land in plot no. 1173, khata no.
333, mauja-Kundri-Sankurha, Harla, circle-Jamui,
which is suitable for the construction of the
Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan.
10. That, accordingly, the Collector, Jamui,
after considering the measurement report sent by the
Circle Officer, Jamui, has sent proposal vide letter
no. 719 dated 02-07-2024 to the Additional Secretary,
Panchayati Raj Department, Bihar, Patna, after
making necessary amendment, whereby the land
under plot no. 1173, khata no. 333, area-50 dismil,
mauja-Kundri-Sankurha, Harla, circle-Jamui, has
been found to suitable for the construction of the
Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan. Further, the said land is
free from being under GairmajaruaAam/land
ceiling/forest cover/water body or any other land
dispute.
11. That, the Block Panchayati Raj Officer,
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
7/13

Jamui, vide letter no. 256 dated 19-09-2025 has
sought current status from Circle Officer, Jamui, with
regard to the said land.
12. That, the Circle Officer, Jamui, vide letter
no. 1237 dated 10-10-2025 has submitted enquiry
report on the complaint of the writ petitioner, wherein
it has been clearly mentioned that the construction of
the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawanis being done in
Kundri-Sankurha Panchayat, which is the
headquarter village of the said Gram Panchayat,
which is in accordance with the departmental
guidelines issued vide letter no. 8354 dated 30-08-
2022 (Annexure-P/6) wherein it has been stated the
construction of the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan shall
be done generally in the headquarter village of the
Gram Panchayat and as per earlier guidelines
contained in Letter No 7593 dated 26.11.2019in case
of non-availability of land in the headquarter village
suitable land in other village of the Gram Panchayat
Area may be chosen by the concerned Collector.
13. That, the proposal sent by the Mukhiya,
Smt. Gita Mandal (petitioner), with regard to plot no.
2614 which is 'GairmajaruaAamDagar' land, has not
been found to be suitable. Thus, the office of the
District Panchayat Raj Officer, Jamui, vide letter no.
588 dated 29-05-2024 has sought fresh proposal
pursuant to which the aforesaid proposal report has
been submitted by the Circle Officer, Jamui.
14. That, the land proposed by the Mukhiya,
Smt. Gita Mandal, with regard to plot no. 2614 does
not lie under the headquarter of the Panchayat
whereas it comes under the village Harla. This is not
in accordance with the departmental guidelines dated
30-08-2022.
Further, the nature of the land is 'Dagar'
which is not in accordance with the said
departmental guidelines, wherein it has been
mentioned that the nature of the land chosen shall not
be 'pokhar', 'taalab', ‘sadak’, ‘bhind’, ‘pind’,
‘aahar’, ‘paine’, ‘nala’, ‘jungle’ etc.
15. That, in view of the aforesaid facts, it is
apparent that the proposal sent by the Collector,
Jamui to the Additional Secretary, Panchayati Raj
Department, Bihar, Patna, vide letter no. 713 dated
02-07-2024 is tenable in the eyes of law.
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
8/13

16. That, accordingly, S.B.D. Tender No.
33/2024-25 dated 17-02-2025 (Annexure-P/8 of the
writ petition) has been issued for the construction of
the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan under Kundri-
Sankurha Panchayat, by the Executive Engineer,
Building Construction Department.
17. That, it is humbly submitted that S.B.D.
Tender No. 33/2024-25 dated 17-02-2025, has
already been issued for the construction of the
Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan on the most suitable land.
Thus, claim made by the petitioner for the
construction of the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan, on
plot no. 2614, khata no. 334, mauja-Kundri-
Sankurha, Harla, circle-Jamui, is baseless,
misleading and fit to be rejected.”

5. The rejoinder affidavit has been filed by the

petitioners to the counter affidavit filed by respondent nos. 3

to 8, paragraphs no. 3 to 5 whereof are reproduced

hereinbelow:-

“3. That with regard to the statements made
in paras 12 & 14 of the counter affidavit under reply,
it is stated that the same are incorrect and denied. The
Panchayat Bhawan at Harla is in fact within The
village headquarter which is evident from checklist
prepared by the respondent authorities (Annexure-P/4,
relevant page 36 of the writ petition), wherein it has
been mentioned that the land is situated in the village
headquarter. Letter dated 10.10.2025 is merely an
unfounded post facto justification being advanced
after filing of the present writ petition.

4. That it is stated that it has come to the
knowledge of the petitioner that the land where the
Panchayat Bhawan is now being constructed has been
approved for construction of PACS Godown through
letter no. 1341 dated 09.10.2023. Therefore also, the
current land for construction is not appropriate for
Panchayat Bhawan.
5. That with regard to the statements made in
para 13 of the counter affidavit under reply, it is
submitted that the same is incorrect and denied. The
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
9/13

land is suitable for constructing the Panchayat
Bhawan as is evident from the checklist forming part
of the proposal at Annexure-P/3 at page 34 and
Annexure-P/4, relevant page 36 of the writ petition. It
has been specifically mentioned that even though the
land is described as Dagar, the breadth and width are
sufficient. Moreover, according to the checklist, the
said land is suitable and does not suffer from any
infirmity.”

6. Mr. Y.V. Giri, learned Senior counsel for the

petitioners being assisted by Ms. Shrishti Singh, has placed

before us Annexure-P/2 and Annexure-P/7 and advanced the

argument that the decision taken to change the site is arbitrary

and some extraneous consideration was there for taking such a

decision.

7. However, learned counsel for the State has placed

reliance on Annexure-P/6 to the counter affidavit, wherein, it

is specifically stated that minimum 50 decimals of land is

required for construction of Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan and

further procedures have been laid down therein. Learned

counsel for the State has also submitted that in similar matter

a Division Bench of this Court in its judgment dated

19.09.2025 passed in CWJC No. 11302 of 2025 (Shiv

Shankar Singh Vs. The State of Bihar and Anr) has taken

note of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which are

as follows:-

“(a) State of Himachal Pradesh and
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
10/13

Others vs. Himachal Pradesh Nizi Vyavsayik
Prishikshan Kendra Sangh, reported in (2011) 6
SCC 597 in which it is held that Courts are not
intended to and should not substitute their views in
the views of the Executive in policy matters;
(b) BALCO Employees’ Union (Regd.)
vs. Union of India and Others, reported in (2002)
2 SCC 333 in which it is held that unless a policy
decision is arbitrary, mala fide or contrary to
statutory provisions, Courts cannot interfere;
(c) Narmada Bachao Andolan vs. Union
of India and Others, reported in (2000) 10 SCC
664 in which it is held that Courts should not
examine the wisdom or correctness of policy
choices.”

8. After going through the averments taken in the writ

petition, counter affidavit and the rejoinder to the counter

affidavit, we find that in view of the notification issued by the

Panchayati Raj Department under Annexure-P/6 and since the

minimum land was not available as far as the earlier site is

concerned, which was chosen at the first instance for

construction of Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan, the present

decision has been taken, however, law is well settled that in

the policy matters of Government, the Court should not

interfere unless there is palpable illegality or malafideness and

the decision is against the public interest.

In the case of Directorate Of Film Festivals And Ors.

Vs. Gaurav Ashwin Jain And Ors. : 2007 SCC OnLine SC

500, in paragraph 14, it has been held as follows :
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
11/13

“14. The scope of judicial review of governmental
policy is now well defined. Courts do not and
cannot act as Appellate Authorities examining the
correctness, suitability and appropriateness of a
policy. Nor are courts Advisors to the executive on
matters of policy which the executive is entitled to
formulate. The scope of judicial review when
examining a policy of the government is to check
whether it violates the fundamental rights of the
citizens or is opposed to the provisions of the
Constitution, or opposed to any statutory
provision or manifestly arbitrary. Courts cannot
interfere with policy either on the ground that it is
erroneous or on the ground that a better, fairer or
wiser alternative is available. Legality of the
policy, and not the wisdom or soundness of the
policy, is the subject of judicial review.”

In the case of Centre For Public Interest Litigation

And Another Vs. Union Of India And Others : (2000) 8

SCC 606, in para-21, it has been held as follows :

“21. ………..The duty of the court is thus to confine
itself to the question of legality. Its concern should
be:
(1) Whether a decision-making authority exceeded
its powers?
(2) committed an error of law;
(3) committed a breach of the rules of natural
justice,
(4) reached a decision which no reasonable
tribunal would have reached or,
(5) abused its powers.
Therefore, it is not for the court to determine
whether a particular policy or particular decision
taken in the fulfilment of that policy is fair…...”
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
12/13

In the case of Parisons Agrotech (P) Ltd. and Ors.

Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors. : AIR 2015 SC 3335, in

para 12, it has been held as follows :

“12. No doubt, the writ court has adequate power
of judicial review in respect of such decisions.
However, once it is found that there is sufficient
material for taking a particular policy decision,
bringing it within the four corners of Article 14 of
the Constitution, power of judicial review would
not extend to determine the correctness of such a
policy decision or to indulge into the exercise of
finding out whether there could be more
appropriate or better alternatives. Once we find
that parameters of Article 14 are satisfied; there
was due application of mind in arriving at the
decision which is backed by cogent material; the
decision is not arbitrary or irrational and; it is
taken in public interest, the Court has to respect
such a decision of the Executive as the policy
making is the domain of the Executive and the
decision in question has passed the test of the
judicial review.”

In the case of in State of Orissa and Ors. v. Gopinath

Dash and Ors. : (2005) 13 SCC 495, it has been held as

follows :

“5. While exercising the power of judicial review
of administrative action, the Court is not the
Appellate Authority and the Constitution does not
permit the Court to direct or advise the executive
in the matter of policy or to sermonise qua any
matter which under the Constitution lies within the
sphere of the legislature or the executive, provided
these authorities do not transgress their
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
13/13

constitutional limits or statutory power.
6. xx xxxx xxx
7. The policy decision must be left to the
Government as it alone can adopt which policy
should be adopted after considering all the
points from different angles. In the matter of
policy decisions or exercise of discretion by the
Government so long as the infringement of
fundamental right is not shown the courts will
have no occasion to interfere and the Court will
not and should not substitute its own judgment
for the judgment of the executive in such
matters. In assessing the propriety of a decision
of the Government the Court cannot interfere
even if a second view is possible from that of the
Government.”

9. In view of such settled principle of law laid down by

the Hon’ble Supreme Court, we find no perversity or illegality

on the part of the Government in taking the decision, and we

are not inclined to interfere with the same.

10. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed.

11. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of.

(Sangam Kumar Sahoo, CJ)

ranjan/- (Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 22.01.2026
Transmission Date NA

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…