Patna High Court
Md. Nabi JanversusThe State Of Bihar and Ors
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The petition is dismissed as abated due to the death of the sole petitioner, with liberty granted to the heirs to file a fresh petition.
Summary
Petitioner Md. Nabi Jan filed a writ petition seeking quashing of a 2010 order that directed him to remove encroachment on land and cancelled his Jamabandi, as well as a 2016 order by the Bihar Land Tribunal that remanded the case for fresh hearing. The petition also requested a certiorari writ. During proceedings, it was disclosed that the sole petitioner had died. The State counsel raised no objection to any relief. The Court held that the petition could not continue as the petitioner was deceased and therefore dismissed it as abated, while allowing the heirs to file a fresh petition if they wish.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition can continue when the sole petitioner has died
- Whether the petition should be dismissed as abated or allowed to proceed on behalf of the heirs
Subjects
- land dispute
- writ petition
- certiorari
- abated petition
- death of petitioner
- Bihar Land Tribunal
- Jamabandi
- encroachment
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2496 of 2017
======================================================
Md. Nabi Jan S/o Abdul Rahman Resident of Mohalla- Meena Bazar
Panchayat Tapta, P.S.- Rahika , District- Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Land and
Revenue Reforms, Bihar, Patna
2. The Bihar Land Tribunal Patna through its Administrative Member.
3. The Divisional Commissioner, Darbhanga Division, Darbhanga.
4. The Collector, Madhubani.
5. The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms Sadar, Madhubani.
6. Md. Kasim S/o late Manir resident of Village- Tharhesari, P.O.- Jagatpur,
P.S. Rahika, District- Madhubani.
7. Most. Dukhani Devi W/o late Sikandar Ram Resident of Mohalla- Gadiyani,
Chamartoli, Ward No. 11, P.O. P.S. Madhubani Town, District- Madhubani.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ratanakar Jha, Advocate
: Ms. Prerna, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sajid Salim Khan, SC-25
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
4 10-02-2026 Heard Mr. Ratnakar Jha, learned counsel for the
petitioner duly assisted by Ms. Prerna and learned counsel
representing the State.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
grant of following relief(s):
“(i) to issue an appropriate order/s,
direction/s including a writ preferably in the
nature of CERTIORARI for quashing the order
dated 21.08.2010 passed in Land Dispute Case
Patna High Court CWJC No.2496 of 2017(4) dt.10-02-2026
2/3
No. 01/2010-11 filed by the private Respondent
No.5 before the competent authority under the
Bihar Land Dispute Resolution Act i.e. D.C.L.R.
Sadar Madhubani whereby and where under
aforesaid case was allowed in favour of the
Private respondents No. 6 and the petitioner was
directed to remove encroachment from the land
measuring 7 Katha 4 dhur appertaining to Khata
No. 508, Khesra No. 5907 situated in mauza
Jagatpur within Rahika in the district of
Madhubani and thereby dispossesses the said
private Respondent No.6 from the aforesaid land
and also canceled the Jamabandi No. 773/774
running the name of the petitioner.
(ii) to quash the order dated
29.11.2016 passed in B.L.T. Case No. 606 of
2014 passed by learned Administrative Member
Bihar Land Tribunal Patna whereby and where
under he has remanded back the aforesaid case
to the Divisional Commissioner, Darbhanga
Division, Darbhanga for hearing a fresh wherein
both the petitioner and private respondent No. 6
Patna High Court CWJC No.2496 of 2017(4) dt.10-02-2026
3/3
and 7 are parties.
(iii) to any other relief/s to which the
petitioner is entitled in the facts and
circumstances of the case.”
3. It has been informed by learned counsel for the
petitioner that the sole petitioner is no more and as such, liberty
be grated to the heirs to move afresh if he/she/they so want.
4. Learned State counsel has no objection.
5. In that background, the writ petition is disposed of
as abated in view of the fact that the sole petitioner is no more,
granting liberty to the heirs to approach afresh, if he/she/they so
want.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U
Checking your session…