Patna High Court
Sarita DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court held that the proper remedy is to direct the petitioner to approach the Collector with supporting documents, rather than issuing mandamus or imposing costs.
Summary
Sarita Devi filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the removal of her land from the Rok Suchi (restriction) register, claiming she had been gifted the land in 2014 and later sold part of it. She alleged that despite peaceful possession, the land was placed under restriction, preventing further registration, and that the revenue authorities failed to address her grievance. The petition also sought costs against the respondents for non‑compliance with earlier orders of coordinate benches. The Court considered whether it could issue mandamus or impose costs, and whether it should instead direct the petitioner to approach the Collector with the necessary documents. It concluded that the appropriate remedy is to have the petitioner file a petition before the Collector, who must hear the matter and pass a reasoned order within three months, without delegating the duty. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed without granting mandamus or imposing costs.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus directing removal of the land from the Rok Suchi register
- Whether the Court may impose costs on the respondents for failure to comply with prior orders
- Whether the appropriate remedy is to direct the petitioner to approach the Collector for resolution
Subjects
- Rok Suchi
- restriction register
- mandamus
- land revenue
- Bihar
- High Court
- petition disposal
- collector jurisdiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2030 of 2025
======================================================
Sarita Devi W/o Surendra kumar Agarwal @ Surendra Agraval Resident of
Gram Shyampur Bazar, PS-Adapur, Dist.-East Champaran, Bihar-845301
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Additional Chief Secretary, Department of
Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar,
2. The District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari.
3. The Additional District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Abhishek, Advocate
Mr. Shivesh Sinha, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Swapnil Kumar Singh, AC to GP 19
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
5 23-03-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The present writ petition has been preferred for
grant of following reliefs:-
“a. for issuance of appropriate writ,
order or direction in the nature of Writ of
Mandamus, commanding the concerned
respondent for the removal of petitioner’s land
from Rok Suchi/Restriction Register which is
bearing plot number 370 and 371 having rakba
20.41 and 39.95 decimal respectively under
Khata Number 134 and 143 situated in Mauza-
Auraiya, Thana-97, P.S.- Adapur, under
Jamabandi No.- 1715.
b. for any other appropriate writ/writs,
order/orders or direction/directions which the
Patna High Court CWJC No.2030 of 2025(5) dt.23-03-2026
2/3
petitioner deemed entitled to in the light of facts
and circumstances of the case.”
3. The petitioner claims to have been gifted the
aforesaid piece of land from his father-in-law, Madan Lal
Agarwal in the year 2014 (16.04.2014) who in turn purchased it
from one Sri Lal Bhartiya, in the year 1974.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that she was having
peaceful possession over land in question and actually the sold
part of it to one Atma Sah on 18.07.2023. However to her
surprise, she got information that it has been put in the category
of (Rok Suchi) inasmuch as no transfer can be subsequently
registered so far as this land is concerned.
5. Aggrieved, she represented before all the Revenue
Officials up to the level of Additional Chief Secretary, Gaya,
Patna, without any success forcing her to file the present writ
petition.
6. It is to be noted that the writ petition was filed in
the month of February, 2025 after service of copies to learned
State counsels but despite the matter being taken up by different
coordinate Benches on 11.02.2025, 14.02.2025 and 18.11.2025,
the respondents chose not to answer to the grievance put forth
by the petitioner.
7. This Court has two options either to impose heavy
Patna High Court CWJC No.2030 of 2025(5) dt.23-03-2026
3/3
cost upon the respondents while having fail to comply the
successive orders passed by the coordinate Benches.
Alternatively, to direct the petitioner to approach the Collector,
East Champaran, Motihari in next four weeks along with all the
relevant documents.
8. With the consent of the parties, this Court moves
for the second option. The petitioner to file a petition with all
the supportive documents before the Collector, East Champaran,
Motihari in next four weeks who shall be duty bound to take up
the matter, call the respondent and thereafter pass a reasoned
order within three months thereafter.
9. It is made clear that the order has to be passed by
the Collector, East Champaran, Motihari and shall not be
delegated to any Revenue Officer working under him.
10. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition
stands disposed of.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ranjeet/-
U
Checking your session…