Patna High Court
Ramayan SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court held that the Circle Officer must pass a reasoned order after a fresh show‑cause is filed, and the writ petition was disposed with directions to maintain the status‑quo.
Summary
The petitioner, Ramayan Singh, challenged an order dated 28‑06‑2025 issued by the Collector that allegedly encroached upon his land without proper enquiry, notice, or a fair hearing. He also sought to quash a measurement report dated 29‑11‑2025 prepared in his absence and claimed violation of natural justice under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act. The State argued that a joint enquiry report showed part of the land was encroached and produced an order dated 12‑02‑2026, which the court found deficient because it lacked case details and did not consider the petitioner’s show‑cause submission. The court held that the Circle Officer must issue a reasoned order after the petitioner files a fresh show‑cause, and directed that the status‑quo be maintained until such an order is passed. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed with directions for the petitioner to file a fresh show‑cause and for the Circle Officer to decide within six weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether the Collector’s order and measurement report were passed without due process and in violation of natural justice.
- Whether the Circle Officer’s order is valid despite lacking case number, party names, and consideration of the petitioner’s show‑cause.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to quash the orders and maintain the status‑quo pending a reasoned order.
Subjects
- land encroachment
- natural justice
- due process
- show cause
- reasoned order
- status quo
- writ petition
- measurement report
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.231 of 2026
======================================================
Ramayan Singh S/o- Late Sukhdev Singh, R/o Village and P.O- Dharupur,
P.S- Bikramganj, District- Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, Land Reforms
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
2. The Divisional Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna
3. The Collector, Rohtas District- Rohtas.
4. The Sub Divisional Officer, Bikramganj, District- Rohtas
5. The Circle Officer, Bikramganj, District- Rohtas.
6. The Executive Engineer, Son Canal Division, Bikramganj, Rohtas.
7. The Sub Divisional Officer, Son Canal, Sub Division, Kowath, District-
Rohtas.
8. Geeta Kuer W/o- Late Prabhu Singh R/o Village and P.O- Dharupur, P.S-
Bikramganj, District-Rohtas.
9. Manoj Kumar S/o- Late Prabhu Singh R/o Village and P.O- Dharupur, P.S-
Bikramganj, District-Rohtas.
10. Aydhya Singh S/o- Late Brij Bihari Singh R/o Village and P.O- Dharupur,
P.S-Bikramganj, District-Rohtas.
11. Manoranjan Singh S/o- Late Vishwanath Singh R/o Village and P.O-
Dharupur, P.S-Bikramganj, District-Rohtas.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashutosh Tripathy, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Kumar Pankaj, AC to SC-5
For resp. nos. 8 & 9 : Mr. Janardan Singh, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
4 27-04-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The present application has been preferred for the
following relief(s):
for issuance of an appropriate
writ/order/direction for quashing the order
dated 28.06.2025 passed by Collector
Patna High Court CWJC No.231 of 2026(4) dt.27-04-2026
2/6
(Second Appellate Authority) District-Rohtas
in Complaint Case No.
9999901151224523338/2A whereby and
where under, the Collector has passed the
order without making the appropriate
enquiry pertaining to the land in question,
without clarifying the actual fact, and
without issuance notice to the petitioner in
the proceeding before him or any authorities.
Although disputed land has already been
measured and demarcated at the request of
respondent no.9, but he is filing petition one
and another just to harass the petitioner.
1/A. That the petitioner further
prays for issuance an appropriate
writ/order/direction for quashing the
measurement report dated 29.11.2025 which
has been measured in absence of petitioner
or his family members and the report has
been prepared wrongly under pressure of
Respondent No.11 the Chairman Nagar
Parishad Bikramganj, violation of the
principal of natural Justice and due process
under the Bihar public Land Encroachment
Act.
1/B. That the petitioners also pray
for issuance an appropriate
writ/order/direction upon the respondents
not to interfere with the possession of the
petitioner over the said land because they
Patna High Court CWJC No.231 of 2026(4) dt.27-04-2026
3/6
have got no jurisdiction or authorities under
the law to make measurement of the land of
Son Canal, Although Executive Engineer has
already verified and stated in his letter that
the petitioner has not encroached the land of
canal. But respondent no.9 wants to any how
demolish the house of petitioner.
1/C. That the petitioner also prays
for commanding the official respondents to
suitably compensate the petitioner for the
illegal, arbitrary an unconstitutional action
of the respondents ignoring the law.
1/D. That the petitioner further
prays for issuance of any other appropriate
writ / order / direction to which the petitioner
is found entitled to.
3. The matter relates to an Encroachment Proceeding
No. 02 of 2025-26 (State vs. Ramayan Singh) in which
recording that certain part of the Khesra No. 569 has been
encroached by the petitioner. Accordingly, he was put on notice
on 15.12.2026.
4. The contention of the petitioner is that he duly
appeared and submitted his show cause. Though the said
contention is not part of the writ petition, learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that his statement be recorded that show
cause has already been filed.
Patna High Court CWJC No.231 of 2026(4) dt.27-04-2026
4/6
5. The counter affidavit has come on behalf of the
respondent nos. 3 to 5 and learned State Counsel has taken this
Court to the Joint Enquiry Report submitted by the Amins to
show that certain part of the land has been encroached by the
petitioner.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
notice was issued, he submitted show cause and there is nothing
on record to show that a proper order has been passed
whereafter they can step for the removal of the encroachment.
7. Learned State Counsel took this Court to Annexure-
R/10 to show that an order has been passed.
8. This Court has taken note of the Annexure-R/10
which is an order dated 12.02.2026 and the short order read as
under:
12-02-26 vfHkys[k miLFkkfirA dk;kZikyd inkf/kdkjh uxj ifj"kn fcØexat ,oa dk;Zikyd
vfHk;ark lksu ugj izeaMy fcØexat }kjk vHkhrd viuk i{k ugha j[kk x;k gS bl laca/k esa iqu% Lekj
i= fuxZr djsa lkFk gh mijksDr [kkrk [ksljk dh Hkwfe ij fcgkj yksd Hkwfe vfrØe.k vf/kfu;e] 1956
ds /kkjk 6¼1½ ds rgr ;g vkns'k ikfjr fd;k tkrk gS fd vfrØe.kdkjh Jh jkek;.k flag
xzke$iks0& /kk:iqj ekStk&/kk:iqj Fkkuk la[;k&526 [kkrk la[;k&631 [ksljk&569 vukokn loZ
lk/kkj.k dh Hkwfe ls vfrØfer lajpuk fiyj] 'kkSpky; bR;kfn fnukad 19-02-26 rd Lo;a gVk ysa]
vU;rk iz'kklu }kjk cy iwoZd vfrØe.k gVk;k tk;sxk vfrØe.kdŸkkZ dks fcgkj lkoZtfud
Hkwfe vfrØe.k vf/kfu;e 1956 dh /kkjk&6+ dh mi/kkjk ¼2½ ds rgr izi=&II esa uksfV'k fuxZr djsaA
vfHkys[k fnukad 28-02-26 dks miLFkkfir djsaA
g0@&
g0@&
vapykf/kdkjh]
vapykf/kdkjh]
fcØexaat] jksgrklA fcØexaat] jksgrklA
9. Having heard the parties, this Court is of the view
that this certainly cannot be considered as a valid and just order
passed by the respondent authority, particularly the Circle
Patna High Court CWJC No.231 of 2026(4) dt.27-04-2026
5/6
Officer, Bikramganj, Rohtas. Neither the case number is there
nor the party names are available. Worst, even the show cause
submitted by the petitioner has not been considered and/or the
satisfaction of the Circle Officer, Bikrmaganj is there that he is
satisfied about the encroachment and in that background, is
passing the reasoned order.
10. Having recorded the aforesaid facts as also the
short order of the Circle Officer, Bikramganj, this Court is of the
view that he is duty-bound to pass a reasoned order in
accordance with law to escape adverse order from the Court.
11. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he
shall once again be submitting a fresh show cause before the
concerned Circle Officer in next once week and further
undertakes that on the next date fixed, he will be appearing
diligently, failing which an appropriate order can be passed.
12. Learned State Counsel submits that if a fresh show
cause is filed, it will be considered and a reasoned order will be
passed.
13. In that background, the writ petition is disposed of
allowing the petitioner to act as per the undertaking/ direction
given above and it is expected from the Circle Officer,
Bikramganj to pass a reasoned order within six weeks from the
Patna High Court CWJC No.231 of 2026(4) dt.27-04-2026
6/6
date the show cause is filed by the petitioner incorporating the
point that has been taken by the petitioner in his show cause. If
the petitioner fails to appear thereafter, even then the C.O.,
Bikramganj shall be taking the matter to its logical conclusion.
14. Needless to add, till the Circle Officer,
Bikramganj passes an order, the status quo as existing today
shall be maintained.
15. Pending I.A.(s), if any, stands stands disposed of.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Vijay Singh/-
U
Checking your session…