Patna High Court
Tinku PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court held that the writ petition is disposed without granting mandamus and directed the petitioner to seek relief from the Executive Officer of the Nagar Panchayat.
Summary
The petitioner, Tinku Paswan, entered into a settlement agreement with the Nagar Panchayat, Raniganj for the collection of taxes (Sairat) on the Barbana Hat for Rs.62,00,000 covering 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025. He began collecting taxes from 1‑15 April 2024 but was ordered to stop by the Divisional Commissioner on 15 April 2024 due to the Model Code of Conduct applicable during the 2024 elections. Collection resumed only on 12 July 2024 and continued till the contract expiry, leading the petitioner to claim a refund for the period 16 April‑11 July 2024 and to seek a mandamus directing the respondents to extend the contract term. The respondents contended that the petitioner should seek relief from the Executive Officer of the Nagar Panchayat. The Court noted the factual admissions, recognized the petitioner’s entitlement to a refund for the blocked period, and declined to issue mandamus, directing the petitioner to approach the Executive Officer for a decision within six weeks, with interest payable if delayed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to an extension of the contract period and continued collection of Sairat despite the election‑related order.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a refund for the period during which collection was prohibited.
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing the respondents to extend the contract term.
Subjects
- contract settlement
- mandamus
- Model Code of Conduct
- municipal authority
- refund
- interest
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2389 of 2025
======================================================
Tinku Paswan Son of Sahdeo Paswan, resident of Mohalla- Raniganj, Paswan
Tola, Ward No. 6, P.O. - Maryganj, P.S. Raniganj, District - Araria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Urban Development and Housing
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Divisional Commissioner, Purnea Division, Purnea.
4. The Nagar Panchayat, Raniganj, P.O. and P.S. Raniganj, District- Araria.
5. The Executive Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Raniganj, P.O. and P.S. Raniganj,
District- Araria.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Awnish Kumar, Advocate
For the Respon.No.4&5 : Mr.Rajesh Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Rohit Singh, AC to GP-6
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
5 27-04-2026 Heard Mr. S.B.K. Mangalam, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the Nagar
Panchayat, Raniganj as also learned State Counsel Mr. Rohit
Singh, Mr. Sanjay Kumar for the State.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
following relief/s:
(i) for issuance of an appropriate writ in the
nature of MANDAMUS commanding and
directing the Respondent Authorities for
extension of time of contract by which a
Sairat was settled in favour of the petitioner
Patna High Court CWJC No.2389 of 2025(5) dt.27-04-2026
2/5
on the ground that according to terms of
contract, the petitioner was entitled to take
possession of Sairat in question with effect
from 1st of April,2024 and he was entitled to
continue till 31.03.2025, however, due to
arbitrary order and illegal action of the
Respondents, the possession of Sairat in
question was since handed over to the
petitioner on 12.07,2024, he is entitled for
collection of Sairat till 11.07.2025;
(ii) for a declaration that since the petitioner
had already deposited the full and final
settlement amount of Sairat in question
before 31.03.2024 itself, his entitled for
collection of said Sairat until 31.07.2025
cannot.
3. The Nagar Panchayat, Raniganj entered into an
agreement with the petitioner with regard to the settlement of
Barbana ‘Hat’ for a consideration amount of Rs.62,00,000/- for
the period 01.04.2024 to 31.03 2025 (Annexure-P/4 to the
petition).
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no
Patna High Court CWJC No.2389 of 2025(5) dt.27-04-2026
3/5
sooner he started collecting the tax, in came, the order of the
Divisional Commissioner, Purnea Division, Purnea dated
15.04.2024 observing that since Model Code of Conduct was
already there pursuant to the 2024 Parliamentary Election, the
Nagar Panchayat, Raniganj wrongly entered into an agreement
which be taken up only after the election period is over/the
Model Code of Conduct comes to an end.
5. The submission is that finally from 12.07.2024 till
31.03.2025. He could realize the amount. The submission is that
he had tasted of fruits only between:
(i) 01.04.2024 to 15.04.2024;
(ii) 12.07.2024 to 31.03.2025
6. In that background, he is entitled to the refund for
the rest of two months 27 days (16.04.2024 to 11.07.2024).
7. A counter affidavit has come on behalf of the
Nagar Panchayat, Raniganj and Mr. Rajesh Kumar representing
the respondent submits that the facts are already on record
which cannot be denied and in that background, if the petitioner
approaches the Nagar Panchayat, Raniganj; an appropriate order
shall be passed on his claims for the refund of the amount.
8. This Court has taken note of the facts of the case as
Patna High Court CWJC No.2389 of 2025(5) dt.27-04-2026
4/5
also the submissions put forward by the parties. The facts which
are in the domain and not denied by the respondents is/are that:
(i) the parties entered into the settlement for
the Barbana Hat for a consideration amount
of Rs. 62,00,000/-;
(ii) it was for the period between 01.04.2024
to 31.03.2025;
(iii) pursuant thereto, the petitioner started
taking rent from 01.04.2024 to 15.04.2024;
(iv) pursuant to the order of the
Commissioner, Purnea Division, Purnea as
recorded above which led to stoppage of the
work of the petitioner;
(v) it commenced only on 12.07.2024 and
continued till the last date (31.03.2025;
(vi) in that background, he certainly entitled
to refund of the amount.
9. In that background, the writ petition is disposed of
allowing the petitioner to approach the respondent no.05, the
Executive Officer, Raniganj, Araria in next two weeks who shall
be taking a decision within a period of further six weeks.
Patna High Court CWJC No.2389 of 2025(5) dt.27-04-2026
5/5
10. Needless to add that the amount that is decided by
the Executive Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Raniganj, Araria may
be released in favour of the petitioner by next four weeks failing
which he shall be entitled to an interest of 9% thereafter, till the
amount is paid.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/-
U
Checking your session…