Patna High Court
Satish KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner must first approach the District Collector for redress, and therefore the writ petition was disposed.
Summary
Satish Kumar, a sand storage license holder, filed a writ petition seeking mandamus to quash the arbitrary blocking of his ID and password, to set aside a punitive letter (No.5645) alleging unauthorized sand sales, and to restore his ability to operate under his license. The petitioner alleged that no sand stock existed at his site and that the actions were taken without notice or opportunity to be heard. The respondents, representing the State of Bihar and the Mines Department, contended that the petitioner had an alternative remedy before the District Collector. The Court observed that the petitioner should approach the Collector within four weeks for a reasoned order, and that any pending civil or criminal proceedings would be governed by that order. Consequently, the Court held that the writ petition was premature and ordered its disposal. The petition was therefore dismissed with a direction to seek relief from the Collector.
Issues considered
- Whether the closure of the petitioner’s ID and password for sand storage licenses without notice is arbitrary and illegal, warranting a writ of mandamus.
- Whether the punitive letter No.5645 directing action against K‑license holders is baseless and can be quashed.
- Whether the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy before the District Collector, rendering the writ petition inadmissible.
Subjects
- sand mining
- license
- mandamus
- administrative action
- writ petition
- collector jurisdiction
- illegal closure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2518 of 2026
======================================================
Satish Kumar Son of Nageshwar Singh, Resident of Village- Raksiya, Police
Station- Dulhin Bazar, District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
3. The Director, Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
4. The District Magistrate, Patna.
5. The Mineral Development Officer, District Mining Office, Patna.
6. The Mining Inspector, District Mining Office, Patna.
7. The Officer Incharge, Dulhin Bazar Police Station, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Pleader (19)
For the Mines : Mr. Naresh Dikshit, Spl.P.P.
Mr. Brij Bihari Tiwary, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 23-04-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
following relief(s):
“I. For issuance of a writ in the nature of
mandamus for quashing the arbitrary and illegal
action of the respondent authorities in blocking/
closing the petitioners' I.D. and password
appertaining to their respective sand storage
licenses, without any notice or opportunity of
Patna High Court CWJC No.2518 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
2/3
hearing.
II. For quashing the letter No.5645 dated
07.10.2025, so far as it relates to the petitioner by
which a direction has been issued to take punitive
action against all K-license holders for alleged
ground of unauthorized sale beyond the
permissible limit is false, baseless, and without
evidentiary support, especially when no stock of
sand existed at the petitioners' site at the relevant
time.
III. For issuance of a writ in the nature
of mandamus, commanding and directing the
respondent authorities to immediately restore the
petitioners’ I.D. and password and allow them to
carry on lawful business under their valid licenses.
IV. For holding that the alleged ground
of unauthorized sale beyond the permissible limit is
not all applicable in the case of petitioner.
V. For issuance of such other order or
direction as the petitioner may be found entitled to
in the facts and circumstances of the instant case.”
3. The counter affidavit of the Mines Department
Patna High Court CWJC No.2518 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
3/3
shows that the petitioner has remedy before the Collector, Patna
(respondent no. 4) for the redressal of the grievance.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an
FIR has also been lodged in the matter without any information.
5. This Court has taken note of the facts and is of the
opinion that if the petitioner approaches the Collector, Patna in
next four weeks, he shall be passing a reasoned order and any
civil/criminal case that is pending against him, it will be subject
to the final outcome of the reasoned order passed by the
Collector, Patna.
6. The writ petition stands disposed of with the
aforesaid observation.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Adnan/-
U
Checking your session…