Patna High Court
Sanjay Mistry,versusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The writ petition is disposed, directing the petitioner to approach the Circle Officer and the officer to act within six months if the matter remains pending.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjay Mistry, filed a writ petition seeking to cancel a proposal to transfer his and his brothers' land to a Khadi Industry and to obtain revenue receipts and possession of the land, invoking an order dated 09-12-2016 issued by the Sub‑Divisional Public Grievance Redressal Officer. He claimed that the Circle Officer, Ekangarsarai, had been directed to examine the ownership before any recommendation to the State Government but had not acted. The State respondents did not file a reply despite the matter being pending since 2019. Justice Rajiv Roy disposed of the petition, directing the petitioner to approach the Circle Officer within four weeks and, if the matter remained unresolved, obliging the officer to take action within six months. No substantive order on the merits of the land transfer was made. The writ petition was therefore dismissed with directions for further administrative steps.
Issues considered
- Whether the order dated 09-12-2016 directing the Circle Officer to examine the land ownership should be implemented.
- Whether the proposed transfer of the petitioner's land to Khadi Industry can be cancelled.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to revenue receipts and possession of the land pending the resolution of the grievance.
Subjects
- writ jurisdiction
- land ownership
- public grievance redressal
- status quo
- implementation of administrative order
- Circle Officer
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18351 of 2019
======================================================
Sanjay Mistry, Son of Late Ramashish Mistry, Resident of Village- Kukurwal,
Post- Telhara, Block- Ekangarsarai, District- Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Distrct Magistrate, Nalanda Bihar Sharif.
2. The District Magistrate, Nalanda at Bihar Sharif.
3. The Additional District Magistrate, Nalanda at Bihar Sharif.
4. The Sub-Divisional Public Grievance Redressal Officer, Sub Division-
Hilsa, District- Nalanda.
5. The Circle Officer, Ekangarsarai, Nalanda.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Verma, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sajid Salim Khan, SC-25
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 03-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
grant of following relief(s):
“(i) for canceling alleged proposal of
giving land of mother Sumitra Devi of petitioner
as well as petitioner and his brothers to Khadi
Industry in compliance of the order dated
09.12.2016 (Annexure-1) in its letter & spirit of
the Sub-Divisional Public Grievance Redressal
Officer, Sub-Division-Hilsa, distrcit-Nalanda.
(ii) for granting/issuing revenue
Patna High Court CWJC No.18351 of 2019(3) dt.03-02-2026
2/3
receipts of the said land of petitioner to
petitioner and allowing petitioner to continue
and to maintain his as usual ownership, title,
right, interest and possession over his said land
in the interest of justice and law in compliance of
the order dated 09.12.2016 (Annexure-1) in its
letter & spirit of the Sub-Divisional Public
Grievance Redressal Officer, Sub-Division-
Hilsa, district-Nalanda.
(iii) for maintaining status quo of the
land of petitioner without causing any sort of
obstructions and otherwise may deal thereof
pending disposal of this writ application.
(iv)also for other necessary reliefs,
writs, orders and directions in view of the factual
& legal profiles of this case.”
3. The petitioner wants implementation of the order
passed by the Public Grievance Redressal Officer dated
09.12.2016 (Annexure-1) by which the Circle Officer,
Ekangarsarai was directed to look into the matter and see to it
regarding the ownership of the land before sending any
recommendation to the State Government.
Patna High Court CWJC No.18351 of 2019(3) dt.03-02-2026
3/3
4. It is the claim of the petitioner that the Circle
Officer, Ekangarsarai (respondent no.5) sat over the matter for
the which a legal notice was sent followed by the writ petition.
5. As usual, no reply from the State respondents
despite the matter being pending since the year 2019, in that
background, the writ petition is disposed of allowing the
petitioner to approach the concerned Circle Officer,
Ekangarsarai (respondent no.5) in next four weeks and if the
same is still pending, the aforesaid officer is duty bound to pick
up the threads, notice the parties and act in accordance with law
in next six months.
6. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid
observation.
7. Needless to add, if the order goes in favour of the
petitioner, the consequential steps have to be taken by the Circle
Officer, Ekangarsarai.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U
Checking your session…