Patna High Court
Asgar Ali SidiquiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- A ABHISHEK REDDY
Holding
The Court held that the writ petition should be disposed of at the admission stage and the authority must adjudicate the objections under Sections 9 and 10 of the Act.
Summary
The petitioner, Asgar Ali Sidiqui, challenged a notice issued under Section 7 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914, alleging it was improper. He had already filed objections to the notice under Section 9 of the same Act. The High Court, without examining the merits, disposed of the writ petition at the admission stage with the consent of both parties. The Court directed the concerned authority to consider the petitioner’s objections and decide on the maintainability of the notice under Section 10, providing a reasoned order after hearing. The authority was instructed to complete the final order within twelve weeks and communicate it to the parties. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed as the matter was to be resolved administratively.
Issues considered
- Whether the notice issued under Section 7 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914 is maintainable.
- Whether the petitioner’s objections filed under Section 9 should be entertained before the issuance of a final order under Section 10.
Legislation cited
- Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914 — s. 10, 7, 9
Subjects
- writ petition
- public demands recovery act
- notice under Section 7
- objections under Section 9
- maintainability
- administrative law
- high court disposal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16182 of 2025
======================================================
Asgar Ali Sidiqui S/o Md. Kalim 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 (05)
For the State : Mr. S. Raga Ahmad, Adv.
Mr. Alok Ranjan, Adv.
======================================================
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.16182 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…