Patna High Court
Faiyaz AhmadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- A ABHISHEK REDDY
Holding
The writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage, and the authority is directed to decide the objections and pass a reasoned order under Section 10 of the Act.
Summary
Faiyaz Ahmad filed a writ petition challenging a notice issued under Section 7 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914, and had already raised objections under Section 9 of the same Act. The Patna High Court, without examining the merits, disposed of the petition at the admission stage with the consent of both parties. The Court directed the concerned authority to decide the objections and pass a reasoned order under Section 10, ensuring a hearing to the petitioner. The authority was instructed to complete the final order within twelve weeks of receiving the Court’s order and to communicate the decision to the parties. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed as the matter was to be resolved administratively under the Act.
Issues considered
- What is the maintainability of a writ petition challenging a notice issued under Section 7 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914?
- Whether the Court should entertain the petition when objections under Section 9 have already been filed.
Legislation cited
- Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914 — s. 10, 7, 9
Subjects
- writ petition
- public demands recovery
- notice
- objections
- Section 7
- Section 9
- Section 10
- procedural law
- Bihar
- Patna High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16104 of 2025
======================================================
Faiyaz Ahmad Son of Late Md. Ameen, Resident of Village- Khanguradih,
P.S.- Katra, District- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Collector, Muzaffarpur.
2. The Collector, Muzaffarpur.
3. The District Panchayat Raj Officer Cum Certificate Officer, Muzaffarpur.
4. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Gadank Yojna, Muzaffarpur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uday Prakash Shrarma, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Addl. Advocate General (03)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
ORAL ORDER
2 19-01-2026 Without going into the merits of the case, the present
writ petition is disposed of at the stage of ‘Admission’ with the
consent of both the counsels.
2. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner is only
challenging the notice issued under Section 7 of the Bihar and
Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914 and the petitioner
has already filed his objections under Section 9 of the Act, this
court is not inclined to entertain the present writ petition. The
authority is directed to pass the final orders under Section 10
duly taking into the consideration the objections filed by the
petitioner. The authority while dealing with the said objections
shall also go into the question of maintainability of the notice
Patna High Court CWJC No.16104 of 2025(2) dt.19-01-2026
2/2
issued under Section 7 and pass a reasoned order giving reasons
either for accepting or rejecting the objections filed by the
petitioner. It is needless to mention that before passing any
order, the petitioner shall be granted an opportunity of hearing.
The authority shall endeavour to pass final orders as
expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of twelve
weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. Any
order passed shall be communicated to the party.
3. With the above directions, the present writ petition
stands disposed of.
(A. Abhishek Reddy , J)
Gauravkr/-
U
Checking your session…