Patna High Court
Jitendra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
Holding
The High Court cannot entertain parallel proceedings and must dismiss the writ petition, directing the parties to pursue their claims in the pending civil suit.
Summary
The petitioners filed a public interest litigation alleging that private individuals were encroaching on land owned by the Eastern Railway. The petitioners sought relief from the High Court, while the respondents argued that a title suit concerning the same land was already pending before the Sub‑Judge, Gaya, following a remand order. The Court observed that parallel proceedings on the same subject matter could not be entertained and that the dispute was essentially civil, requiring adjudication based on evidence in the appropriate civil court. It further held that any intervenors could be impleaded under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure in the civil suit. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition as there was an adequate remedy in the civil court and ordered its disposal.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can entertain a public interest litigation concerning alleged encroachment when a civil title suit on the same subject is pending.
- Whether intervenors in the writ petition can have their claims considered by the High Court or must be impleaded in the civil suit.
Subjects
- public interest litigation
- encroachment
- railway land
- parallel proceedings
- civil suit
- impleadment
- Code of Civil Procedure
- jurisdiction
- dismissal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1801 of 2026
======================================================
1. Jitendra Kumar Son of Nagendra Sharma, Resident of Village Chhotiya,
Police Station - Hulasganj, District - Gaya.
2. Rangnath Sharma, Son of Lakshman Sharma, Resident of Mohalla
Jheelganj, Police Station - Kotwali, District - Gaya.
3. Ajay Kumar, Son of Ramadhir Singh, Resident of Mohalla Jhilganj, Police
Station - Kotwali, District - Gaya.
4. Ram Kumar Sharma, Son of Uday Sharma, Resident of Mohalla - Bajrang
Colony, Pahsi Lane, Near Balti Factory, Police Station - Kotwali, District -
Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of
Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms,
Government of Bihar.
3. The District Magistrate cum Collector, Gaya.
4. The Additional Collector, Gaya.
5. The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Gaya.
6. The Sub Divisional Officer, Sadar Gaya, District Gaya.
7. The Circle Officer, Sadar Gaya Circle, District Gaya.
8. The Station House Officer, Kotwali Police Station, District Gaya.
9. The Union Of India through the Senior Divisional Engineer, East Central
Railway, Deen Dayal Upadhyay Division, Uttar Pradesh.
10. The Senior Divisional Engineer, East Central Railway, Deen Dayal
Upadhyay Division, Uttar Pradesh.
11. The Assistant Divisional Engineer, East Central Railway, Deen Dayal
Upadhyay Division, Uttar Pradesh.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gajendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. P.K. Verma, A.A.G.-3
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Ghosarvey, A.C. to A.A.G.-3
For the Railway : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate
For the Intervenor : Mr. Dinu Kumar, Advocate
Mrs. Ritika Rani, Advocate
Mr. Ritu Raj, Advocate
Mr. Vardaan Mangalam, Advocate
Mrs. Kanika, Advocate
Patna High Court CWJC No.1801 of 2026 dt.19-06-2026
2/4
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 19-06-2026
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. This Public Interest Litigation has been filed
alleging that land belonging to the Railway Authorities is
being encroached upon by private individuals.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the contesting
respondents invites the attention of this Court to paragraph
4 of the order dated 09.04.2026, which is extracted
hereinbelow:
" 4. It is contended by the learned
counsel for the intervenors that intervenor
petitioner no. 3, Bamdeo Sharma, along with
two others, namely Kunti Kumari and Kunal
Kishore, had instituted Title Suit No.
5/06/406/05 against the Eastern Railways
through its General Manager, Headquarters,
Hajipur. The said suit was dismissed vide
judgment and decree dated 07.01.2012.
Aggrieved by the same, the plaintiffs preferred
Title Appeal No. 67-12/11-12 before the learned
Additional District Judge-IV, Civil Court, Gaya,
who, vide order dated 04.05.2018, was pleased
to set aside the judgment dated 07.01.2012
and decree dated 08.01.2012, and remitted the
matter back to the learned Sub Judge, Gaya for
fresh consideration."
Patna High Court CWJC No.1801 of 2026 dt.19-06-2026
3/4
4. In view of the aforesaid facts, it is apparent
that the Title Suit is presently pending before the learned
Sub-Judge, Gaya, pursuant to the remand order passed by
the learned Additional District Judge-IV, Civil Court, Gaya. In
such circumstances, parallel proceedings in respect of the
same subject matter ought not to be entertained. Further,
upon consideration of the submissions advanced on behalf
of the parties, we are of the considered view that the
dispute is essentially civil in nature. Questions relating to
title, ownership and alleged encroachment can
appropriately be adjudicated only on the basis of evidence
to be led by the respective parties before the competent
Civil Court.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has
submitted that certain intervenors have entered
appearance in the present proceedings and, therefore, their
claims ought to be considered by this Court.
6. Having considered the aforesaid submission,
we are of the opinion that the law provides an adequate
remedy for impleadment of necessary parties before the
Civil Court under the provisions of the Code of Civil
Procedure. The intervenors are at liberty to avail such
remedies as may be available to them in accordance with
law before the competent Civil Court.
7. In the aforesaid circumstances, we find no
reason to keep the present Public Interest Litigation
Patna High Court CWJC No.1801 of 2026 dt.19-06-2026
4/4
pending. The writ petition stands dismissed and disposed
of, accordingly.
(Meenakshi Madan Rai, CJ)
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
Neha/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 22.06.2026
Transmission Date
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.