Patna High Court
Sita Ram Sahu @ Sita Ram SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The order remanding the measurement case for fresh measurement is valid and does not constitute any legal infirmity.
Summary
The petitioner, Sita Ram Sahu, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 13‑04‑2023 passed by the Deputy Collector (Land Reforms), Supaul, which remanded a measurement appeal back to the Circle Officer for fresh measurement of certain land parcels. The petitioner alleged that the measurement process was irregular and that the remand caused prejudice, seeking to set aside the order. The respondents contended that the remand was merely procedural, aimed at correcting the identified irregularities, and did not prejudice the petitioner. The Court examined whether the Deputy Collector had exceeded his jurisdiction or acted arbitrarily in directing a fresh measurement. Finding that the Deputy Collector merely exercised his statutory power to ensure due process and that no substantive prejudice was shown, the Court held the order to be valid. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, with liberty granted to the petitioner to apply to the Circle Officer for fresh measurement.
Issues considered
- Whether the order of the Deputy Collector (Land Reforms) remanding the measurement case for fresh measurement is legally infirm or arbitrary.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to relief against the remand on the ground of prejudice.
Subjects
- land measurement
- demarcation appeal
- writ petition
- fresh measurement
- procedural irregularity
- land reforms
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.198 of 2026
======================================================
Sita Ram Sahu @ Sita Ram Sah son of Late Shivlal Sahu @ Shivlal Sah,
resident of Village and Post Chainsinghpatti, Ward No. 04, P.S. and District -
Supaul (Bihar).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land
Reforms Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate -cum- Collector, Supaul.
3. The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Supaul.
4. The Circle Officer, Supaul.
5. Madan Sah, son of Late Buchay Sah, resident of Village and Post -
Chainsinghpatti, Ward No. 04, P.S. and District - Supaul (Bihar).
6. Pradeep Sah, son of Late Buchay Sah, resident of Village and Post -
Chainsinghpatti, Ward No. 04, P.S. and District - Supaul (Bihar).
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Kamala Kant Tiwary
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Ambastha, Standing Counsel (26)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-01-2026 1. Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner has filed the present writ application
being aggrieved by the order dated 13.04.2023 passed by
D.C.LR., Supaul in Measurement Appeal No. 5 of 2022-23 filed
by the father of respondent nos. 5 & 6.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner’s father purchased a piece of land fully described in
Patna High Court CWJC No.198 of 2026(2) dt.13-01-2026
2/4
paragraph no. 4 of the writ application and a house was
constructed upon 0.12 decimal of plot no. 3236, 3238 and plot
no. 3234 / 3707 having an area of 9 decimal land. The entire
area of plot no. 3234, 3707 is 24 decimal in which 14 decimal
land purchased by the ancestor of the petitioner. 05 decimal of
land in the Southern side was sold in favour of ancestors of
respondent no. 5 & 6 but the father of the petitioner applied
before the Circle Officer, Supaul for measurement of khata No.
32, plot no. 3234 (14 decimal), khata no. 40, plot no. 3236 &
3238 area 12 decimal and khata no. 146/K, plot no. 3234 / 3707
(14 decimal) situated in the village Mauja - Chainsinghpatti, P.S.
No. 149, P.S. + Ancial - Supaul, District - Supaul. Notices were
issued to the Anchal Amin, the petitioner’s father and the
boundary raiyats and date of measurement was fixed on
28.03.2022 and 29.03.2022.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
respondent no. 5 & 6 appeared during the course of
measurement but did not put their signature on the notice. One
of the boundary raiyats was also present after the measurement
was done. The father of respondent no. 5 & 6 filed Demarcation
Appeal no. 05 of 2022-23 before the D.C.L.R., Supaul and the
learned D.C.L.R., Supaul called for the L.C.R. but without
Patna High Court CWJC No.198 of 2026(2) dt.13-01-2026
3/4
waiting for the L.C.R. passed the final order on 13.04.2023 in
the measurement appeal by which the measurement case has
been remanded back to the Circle Officer, Supaul for fresh
measurement after following all the procedures.
5. Mr. Manoj Kumar Ambastha, learned Standing Counsel
- 26 submits that no prejudice has been caused to the petitioner
by virtue of remand inasmuch as learned D.C.L.R., Supaul in
the impugned order has taken note of the irregularity committed
during the course of measurement by the Circle Officer, Supaul
and remanded the matter back to the C.O., Supaul with a
direction that after having received the application for
measurement from any of the parties the Circle Officer, Supaul
shall start fresh measurement process as per procedure and after
perusing the necessary materials / evidence shall ensure a fresh
measurement of the land in question.
6. Considering the submissions made by the parties and the
nature of order passed by the D.C.L.R., Supaul, I am of the
opinion that there is no infirmity in the impugned order
inasmuch as the learned D.C.L.R., Supaul has only remitted the
matter back and has directed for fresh measurement after
following due process.
7. Accordingly, the writ petition is devoid of any merit and
Patna High Court CWJC No.198 of 2026(2) dt.13-01-2026
4/4
the same is disposed with liberty to the petitioner to make an
application before the Circle Officer, Supaul for measurement.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
praful/-
U
Checking your session…