Patna High Court
Most. Meena Devi @ Mina DeviversusThe State Of Bihar and Ors
- Decided
- Disposal
- WITHDRAWN
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The petition was withdrawn, and the court disposed of it without adjudicating the substantive issues.
Summary
Meena Devi filed a writ petition in the Patna High Court seeking certiorari to quash an order dated 04‑07‑2018 that cancelled her jamabandi and mandamus to prevent her dispossession and demolition of her house, alleging conspiracy and misuse of the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956. She also requested compliance with a prior 1999 High Court order and disciplinary action against a Circle Officer. After hearing, counsel for the petitioner sought liberty to withdraw the petition and approach other authorities. The court granted this liberty and disposed of the petition as withdrawn, without addressing the merits of the reliefs sought.
Issues considered
- Whether the order cancelling the petitioner’s jamabandi under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 is liable to be quashed.
- Whether the authorities should be directed by mandamus not to vacate or demolish the petitioner’s house pending lawful procedure.
- Whether the respondents must comply with the earlier High Court order dated 26‑11‑1999 in C.W.J.C. No. 893 of 1989.
- Whether disciplinary action should be taken against the Circle Officer for alleged concealment of facts.
Subjects
- writ petition
- certiorari
- mandamus
- jamabandi
- land encroachment
- withdrawal
- Patna High Court
- Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16575 of 2018
======================================================
Most. Meena Devi @ Mina Devi W/o Late Daya Nand Sahani @ Daya Nand
Chaudhary, Resident of Village-Sammaspur, P.O. and P.S.-Fatuha, Distit-
Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The District Magistrate, District-Patna.
4. The Addicional District Magistrate, District-Patna.
5. The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Patna City, District-Patna.
6. The Circle Officer, Circle -Fatuha, District-Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bimal Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Nutan Sahay, AC to AAG-12
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 27-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
grant of following relief(s):
“(i) for issuance of a writ in the nature of
certiorari for quashing the order dated
04.07.2018 passed in Jamabandi Cancellation
Case No. 20/17-18 by the court of Additional
District Magistrate, Patna, whereby and
whereunder the Jamabandi No. 69/ बडा standing
in the name of the petitioner at Fatuha Anchal
with respect to the land of Plot No. 290, Khata
No. 73, having an area of 2/3 decimal situated at
Mouza-Bankipur Gorakh, Thana No.18, Anchal-
Patna High Court CWJC No.16575 of 2018(2) dt.27-02-2026
2/3
Fatuha, District-Patna has been canceled behind
the back of the petitioner under conspiracy
making erstwhile raiyat Kaushalendra Kumar
Singh as party to the case, who is now not
available in the village, in order to
vacate/dispossess the petitioner from the said
land under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment
Act, 1956.
(ii) for issuance of a writ in the nature
of mandamus commanding and directing the
respondent authorities not to vacate/dispossess
the petitioner and demolish her house, standing
on the above mentioned land without adopting
the procedure of law.
(iii) for issuance of a writ in the nature
of mandamus, commanding and directing the
respondents to comply with the order dated
26.11.1999 passed by this Hon'ble Court in
C.W.J.C. No. 893 of 1989 and consequently they
should approach the competent court as this
petitioner has been in possession of the aforesaid
land as recorded raiyat for a long time.
Patna High Court CWJC No.16575 of 2018(2) dt.27-02-2026
3/3
(iv) for passing necessary orders so
that appropriate and immediate action be taken
against the Circle Officer for concealing the real
facts and representing wrong facts before the
Additional District Magistrate in order to gain
illegal order and vacate the legal possession of
this petitioner and demolish her house standing
on the said land.
(v) for granting any other relief/reliefs
for which the petitioner may be found entitled in
the facts and circumstances of the case.”
3. After some argument, learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that he may be permitted to withdraw the
petition with liberty to approach appropriate authority/court for
redressal of the grievance.
4. Granting said liberty, the writ petition is disposed
of as withdrawn.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U
Checking your session…