Patna High Court
Surendra RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court declined to grant mandamus and directed the District Magistrate to consider the petitioner's representation, noting the pending partition suit.
Summary
The petitioner Surendra Rai filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State authorities to halt construction of a Panchayat Bhawan on land claimed by private respondents, arguing that the land is subject to a pending partition suit. He alleged that the title was improperly transferred to the Governor and that the construction would violate his rights. The court noted the existence of partition suit No.258 of 2009 pending before the Sub‑Judge, Sheohar, and held that the matter must be decided in that suit. Accordingly, the court directed the District Magistrate to consider the petitioner’s representation in accordance with law, taking the pending suit into account, and declined to issue the writ. The petition and any interlocutory applications were disposed of without granting the reliefs sought.
Issues considered
- Can a writ of mandamus be issued to restrain construction on land that is the subject of a pending partition suit?
- May the authorities grant approval for construction when the title of the land is disputed?
- Is the petitioner entitled to an immediate ban on construction pending resolution of the title suit?
Subjects
- mandamus
- writ petition
- partition suit
- land dispute
- Panchayat Bhawan
- construction ban
- pending title suit
- district magistrate
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20875 of 2025
======================================================
Surendra Rai Son of Late Harinandan Rai @ Harnandan Ray, Resident of
Village- Amba Ojha Tola, P.S. and Block and Anchal-Piprahi, District-
Sheohar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj, Department,
Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Bihar, Patna.
3. The District Magistrate, Sheohar.
4. The District Panchayati Raj Officer, Sheohar.
5. The Sub-divisional Officer, Sheohar, District - Sheohar.
6. Deputy Development Commissioner, Sheohar.
7. The Block Development Officer, Piprahi, District-Sheohar.
8. The Circle Officer, Circle-Piprahi, District-Sheohar.
9. Rajesh Kumar, Son of Ramjinis Rai Resident of Village- Amba Ojha Tola,
P.S. and Block and Anchal- Piprahi, District-Sheohar
10. Rajiv Kumar, Son of Ramjinish Rai Resident of Village- Amba Ojha Tola,
P.S. and Block and Anchal- Piprahi, District-Sheohar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Devendra Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Ms. Divya Verma, AC to AAG 3
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 12-01-2026 Heard Mr. Devendra Kumar, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Ms. Divya Verma,
learned AC to AAG 3 for the State.
2. Petitioner has inter alia prayed for following reliefs
in the paragraphs No.1 of the writ petition:-
Patna High Court CWJC No.20875 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/3
“(I) For issuance of writ in the nature of
mandamus for direction to respondent authorities to ban
construction of Panchayat Bhawan bearing khata No.1460,
Khesra No.5162 and Khesra No.5195 land executed by
private respondent nos.9 and 10 on 16/04/2025 in the name
of Governor State of Bihar whereby and whereunder the
approval has been granted by the respondent authorities for
construction of Panchayat Bhawan appertaining to village-
Amba Ojha Tola, P.S. + Block + Anchal- Piprahi, District-
Sheohar as it is not property in the name of private
respondent nos.9 and 10 namely Rajesh Kumar and Rajiv
Kumar though it is a disputed land for which a partition
suit no.258 of 2009 is going on and pending before the
learned Sub-Judge, 1st, Sheohar.
(ii) For direction to the respondent authorities
to dispose of the representation of the petitioner with
reasoned and speaking order within time framed.
(iii) For any other relief/reliefs for which
petitioner is entitled.”
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner
seeks to file a detailed representation before the District
Magistrate, Sheohar for the relief, as prayed for in the writ
petition.
4. Considering the aforesaid specific submission made
on behalf of petitioner, the District Magistrate, Sheohar is
directed to consider the representation of the petitioner, if so
filed, in accordance with law and will also take into
consideration that a title suit is pending between the petitioner
Patna High Court CWJC No.20875 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
3/3
and private respondents no.9 and 10.
5. The writ petition is disposed of.
6. Interlocutory Application(s), if any, also stands
disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Sanjay/-
U
Checking your session…