Patna High Court

Sudhir KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 2 February 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: PURNENDU SINGH

Holding

The court disposed of the petition, finding no compensation payable and leaving the remedy open only if the factual premises are shown to be incorrect.

Summary

The petitioners alleged that the Gram Panchayat of Pipradhi illegally constructed a public drain over their private land (RSP No.4247, Khata No.754) without consent and sought a writ directing its removal and restoration of the land. They submitted an objection on 13‑08‑2020, which was acknowledged by the Prakhand Panchayati Raj Officer, who recommended maintaining the status quo, but no action was taken. The respondents contended that no public drainage existed on the land and cited reports from the Anchal Amin and Circle Officer. The court examined the constitutional scope of Panchayat powers under Article 243G and the Eleventh Schedule, noting that such powers are merely enabling provisions and must be conferred by state legislation. Citing precedents (State of U.P. vs. Zila Parishad, Gaziabad and U.P. Gram Panchayat Adhikari Sangh v. Daya Ram Saroj), the court held that the Panchayat could not unilaterally acquire private land for drainage without statutory authority. It found the respondents' reports unconvincing, noted the State’s admission that the drain was not constructed, and concluded that compensation was not payable, leaving open a remedy if facts differ. Consequently, the petition was disposed of.

Issues considered

Whether the Gram Panchayat has jurisdiction under Article 243G and the Eleventh Schedule to construct a public drain over private land without owners' consent.
Whether the petitioners are entitled to compensation for alleged unauthorized acquisition of their land.
Whether the executive instruction Letter No.3578 dated 17‑06‑2013 validly denies the State’s obligation to pay compensation.

Subjects

Constitution of India
Article 243G
Eleventh Schedule
Panchayat jurisdiction
Land acquisition
Public drainage
Compensation
State entry in Seventh Schedule

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17303 of 2021
======================================================
1. Sudhir Kumar son of Sri Rajendra Prasad Karn resident of Village- Pipradhi,
Tole- Munharwa, Ward No. 5, Anchal and PS- Bajpatti, Dist- Sitamarhi,
presently residing at Village Bhavadepur Goat, Ward No. 18, PS- Riga Dist.-
Sitamarhi.
2. Praveen Kumar Karn son of Raghaw Prasad Karn resident of Village-
Pipradhi, Tole- Munharwa, Ward No. 5, Anchal and PS- Bajpatti, Dist-
Sitamarhi.
3. Manoj Kumar son of Raghaw Prasad Karn resident of Village- Pipradhi,
Tole- Munharwa, Ward No. 5, Anchal and PS- Bajpatti, Dist- Sitamarhi
4. Pawan Kumar son of Late Mahendra Prasad Karn resident of Village-
Pipradhi, Tole- Munharwa, Ward No. 5, Anchal and PS- Bajpatti, Dist-
Sitamarhi
5. Suresh Nandani Devi wife of Late Mahendra Prasad Karn resident of
Village- Pipradhi, Tole- Munharwa, Ward No. 5, Anchal and PS- Bajpatti,
Dist- Sitamarhi
6. Roop Kala Devi wife of Late Yogendra Prasad Karn resident of Village-
Pipradhi, Tole- Munharwa, Ward No. 5, Anchal and PS- Bajpatti, Dist-
Sitamarhi
7. Prabhakar Kumar son of Late Yogendra Prasad Karn resident of Village-
Pipradhi, Tole- Munharwa, Ward No. 5, Anchal and PS- Bajpatti, Dist-
Sitamarhi
.. ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Collector, Sitamarhi.
4. The Deputy Development Commissioner, Sitamarhi.
5. The District Panchayati Raj Officer, Sitamarhi.
6. The Block Development Officer, Bajpatti, Dist.- Sitamarhi.
7. The Prakhand Panchayati Raj Officer, Bajpatti, Dist.- Sitamarhi.
8. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Pipradhi, PS- Bajpatti, Dist.- Sitamarhi.
9. The Ward Member, Ward No. 5, Gram Panchayat Raj, Pipradhi, PS-
Bajpatti, Dist.- Sitamarhi.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vaidehi Raman Prasad Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : AC to AG
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 02-02-2026
Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.17303 of 2021 dt.02-02-2026
2/8

petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

2. Petitioners have inter alia prayed for following

reliefs in the paragraphs No.1 of the writ petition:-

“That this is an application for grant of an
appropriate writ for a direction to the respondents to
remove/fill up the drain (nala) constructed over, RSP
No.4247 under Khata No.754 situated in village Pipradhi,
Dist- Ditmarhi and to restore the land in its original form.”

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

petitioners submitted that without consent the Raiayati land of

the petitioners, appertaining to RSP No. 4247, Khata No.754,

situated in village Pipradhi, Sitamarhi has been illegally

acquired for construction of public drain (nala) by the Gram

Panchayat, Pipradhi. The petitioner no. 1 has filed his objection

dated 13.08.2020 (Annexure- 1) before the In-charge Prakhand

Panchayati Raj Officer, Bajpatti and who vide letter no. 1311 of

2020 submitted his inquiry report before the Block

Development Officer Bajapatti, stating therein that the land in

question is private land of the petitioners and the construction

was made over the same without the consent of the land owners

and requested for maintenance of status quo but till date no

consideration has been made in this regard.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of

respondents submitted that no public drainage subsists over the

aforesaid land in question and the report to said effect has been
Patna High Court CWJC No.17303 of 2021 dt.02-02-2026
3/8

given by the Anchal Amin vide letter dated 24.02.2025 and by

Circle Officer vide letter no.220 dated 25.02.2025.

5. Heard the parties.

6. The Gram Panchayat has its due jurisdiction under

Article 243-G of the Constitution of India. Article 243 G is in

respect of local self-goverance and not in respect of the subject

“Land”. Land is the subject of the State Entry 18, List II of

Seventh Schedule is reproduced hereinafter:

“18. Land, that is to say, rights in or
over land, land tenures including the relation of
landlord and tenant, and the collection of rents;
transfer and alienation of agricultural land; land
improvement and agricultural loans;
colonization.”

7. The inherent jurisdiction of the Panchayat is

contingent upon the extent of power, specifically endowed by

the State Legislature under Entry 5 of List II for the purpose of

local self government or village administration, making the

formal devolution of the Eleventh schedule subjects a

prerequisite for any exercise of administrative or statutory

functions. Entry 5 of List II is reproduced hereinafter:

“5. Local government, that is to say, the constitution and
powers of municipal corporations, improvement trusts,
districts boards, mining settlement authorities and other
local authorities for the purpose of local self-government or
village administration.

8. Schedule 11 of the Constitution of India is
Patna High Court CWJC No.17303 of 2021 dt.02-02-2026
4/8

reproduced hereinafter:

Eleventh Schedule
(Article 243G)
29 Matters Listed in the Eleventh Schedule (As in the
Constitution):
1. Agriculture, including agricultural extension.
2. Land improvement, implementation of land reforms,
land consolidation and soil conservation.
3. Minor irrigation, water management and watershed
development.
4. Animal husbandry, dairying and poultry.
5. Fisheries.
6. Social forestry and farm forestry.
7. Minor forest produce.
8. Small scale industries, including food processing
industries.
9. Khadi, village and cottage industries.
10.Rural housing.
11.Drinking water.
12.Fuel and fodder.
13.Roads, culverts, bridges, ferries, waterways and
other means of communication.
14.Rural electrification, including distribution of
electricity.
15.Non-conventional energy sources.
16.Poverty alleviation programme.
17.Education, including primary and secondary
schools.
18.Technical training and vocational education.
19.Adult and non-formal education.
20.Libraries.
21.Cultural activities.
22.Markets and fairs.
23.Health and sanitation, including hospitals, primary
health centres and dispensaries.
24.Family welfare.
25.Women and child development.
Patna High Court CWJC No.17303 of 2021 dt.02-02-2026
5/8

26.Social welfare, including welfare of the handicapped
and mentally retarded.
27.Welfare of the weaker sections, and in particular, of
the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes.
28.Public distribution system.
29.Maintenance of community assets.

9. In light of the above constitutional provision in

respect of the jurisdiction of the state, local Body can only

implement the scheme entrusted to them by the State or the

Union and it has been settled by the Apex Court in case of

State of U.P. vs. Zila Parishad, Gaziabad reported in (2013) 11

SCC 783, wherein the main observation is contained in

paragraphs no. 23 and 24, which inter alia is reproduced as

under:

“23. ...the provision of Article 243-G is merely an
enabling provision, and it is not a source of
legislation. This view seems to be in consonance
with the law laid down by this Court in U.P. Gram
Panchayat Adhikari Sangh v. Daya Ram Saroj
[(2007) 2 SCC 138 : (2007) 1 SCC (L&S) 773]
wherein an observation has been made that Article
243-G is an enabling provision as it enables the
Panchayats to function as institutions of self-
government. Further, this Court noted that such law
may contain provisions for the devolution of powers
and responsibilities upon Panchayats, subject to
such conditions as may be specified therein, with
respect to the implementation of schemes for
economic development and social justice as may be
entrusted to them, including those in relations to the
matters listed in the Eleventh Schedule. The
enabling provisions are further subject to the
conditions as may be specified. Therefore, it is for
the State Legislature to consider conditions and to
make laws accordingly. It is also open to the State to
eliminate or modify the same.

24. Therefore, it is apparent that Article 243-G read
Patna High Court CWJC No.17303 of 2021 dt.02-02-2026
6/8

with the Eleventh Schedule is not a source of
legislative power, and it is only an enabling
provision that empowers a State to endow functions
and devolve powers and responsibilities to local
bodies by enacting relevant laws. The local bodies
can only implement the schemes entrusted to them
by the State.”

10. Having considered the rival submissions made on

behalf of the parties, I find that the petitioners have brought on

record that in village Pipradhi, the land as described above over

which allegedly Public Drainage (nala) has been constructed.

The petitioners filed their objection on 13.08.2020 before the In-

charge Prakhand Panchayati Raj Officer, Bajpatti. The said

officer, vide Letter No. 1311 of 2020, submitted his inquiry

report to the Block Development Officer, Bajpatti, stating that

the land in question is the private property of the petitioners and

that the construction was carried out on the said land without the

consent of the landowners. He further requested that status quo

be maintained, however, no action or consideration has been

taken in accordance with the inquiry report.

11. This Court finds that the Anchal Amin and the

Circle Officer, concerned have not given any scientific report in

respect of the Nala which has been constructed particularly in

respect of the land which the petitioners have claimed. I don’t

find the report as submitted by the Circle Officer is convincing.

12. In above background of the constitutional
Patna High Court CWJC No.17303 of 2021 dt.02-02-2026
7/8

provision and facts that the State has admitted in paragraph

no.17 of the counter affidavit that till date the Nala has not been

constructed unauthorizedly over the land belonging to the

petitioners, question of payment of compensation, in view of

discussion made hereinabove does not arise. However, in case,

the petitioners find that the information contained in para 17 of

the counter affidavit is incorrect in that case, they may avail

appropriate remedy in accordance with law.

13. Before parting with this order, I find that the

petitioners have not challenged Letter no.3578 dated

17.06.2013. The operative part of the aforesaid letter is

reproduced hereinafter:

“3- mijksDr ifjizs{; esa vuqjks/k gS fd iapk;rh jkt
foHkkx }kjk fofHkUu inksa ls miyC/k djkbZ xbZ jkf”k ls ;kstukvksa dk
dk;ZjEHk@dk;kZUo;u fuEufyf[kr funsZ”kksa dk v{kj”k% vuqikyu lqfuf”pr
dj gh fd;k tk,&

¼i½- bu ;kstukvksa dk fuekZ.k ;Fkk laHko ljdkjh Hkwfe ij gh l{ke izkf/kdkj
ls vuqefr izkIr dj fd;k tk,A
¼ii½ fdlh Hkh izdkj ds Hkou fuekZ.k dh ;kstuk ds fy, ljdkjh tehu
miyC/k ugha gksus ij iapk;rksa }kjk futh tehu ij Hkou fuekZ.k dh
Lohd`fr rHkh nh tk, tc lacaf/kr jS;r }kjk mDr tehu dk jkT;iky ds
uke ls fucaf/kr dj fn;k tk,A
¼iii½ pwafd lM+d@xyh ,oa ukyh ds fuekZ.k dh ;kstukvksa esa
vf/kdka”kr% vusd jS;rksa dh Hkwfe lfEefyr gksrh gS] izfr jS;r lfEefyr
Hkwfe dk jdok dkQh NksVk gksrk gS ,oa dqN Hkw&/kkjh vius ukSdjh@O;olk;
ds dze esa xkao ls ckgj jgrs gS]a blfy, lHkh jS;rksa ls muds tehu dks
jkT;iky ds uke ls fucaf/kr djkuk dkQh tfVy gksxk ,oa ;kstukvksa ds
dk;Z vkjEHk esa foyac gksxk ftlls ;kstuk dh mi;ksfxrk rks dqizHkkfor
gksxh gh] lkFk gh izkDdfyr jkf”k esa o`f) gksxhA vr,o ,sls ekeyksa esa lHkh
jS;rksa ls lwfp dk fuca/ku jkT;iky ds uke ls djkuk ;k mDr tehu dk
vf/kxzg.k djkuk vR;f/kd dfBu izrhr gksrk gSA bl ifjizs{; esa de ls
de fuEufyf[kr dkjZokbZ dj gh ;kstuk izkjEHk djuk O;kogkfjd gksxk%&

14. From perusal of the letter dated 17.06.2013, it

appears that the State has denied its obligation to make any
Patna High Court CWJC No.17303 of 2021 dt.02-02-2026
8/8

payment of compensation, particularly in respect of any village

road, which is constructed over the land of the private persons.

However, it is kept open to consider the validity of Letter No.

3578 dated 17.06.2013, which is an executive instruction, in an

appropriate case, or occasion so arises.

15. Accordingly, the present application stands

disposed of.

(Purnendu Singh, J)
Sanjay/-
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 17.02.2026
Transmission Date NA

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…