Patna High Court
Md. Razak @ Md. Razzak MiyanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner may approach the Collector, who shall notice the parties and adjudicate the matter, and therefore disposed of the writ petition.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Razak, filed a writ petition seeking to set aside several orders passed by the Deputy Collector (Land Reforms) and the Collector/District Magistrate of Saharsa relating to mutation appeals and a revision case. He also sought confirmation of an order refusing his appeal because a title suit was pending, a stay of those orders, and any other appropriate relief. The petitioner argued that the Collector should simply re‑examine the matter and pass a necessary order, a view the State counsel did not oppose. The Court, after hearing counsel, held that the petitioner may approach the Collector, who is directed to notice the parties and resolve the issue expeditiously. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed, allowing the petitioner to agitate the matter before the Collector.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate remedy for the petitioner against the orders of the Deputy Collector (Land Reforms) and the Collector/District Magistrate in the mutation appeals?
- Whether the Court should stay the operation of the impugned orders pending resolution of the writ petition?
Subjects
- writ jurisdiction
- mutation appeal
- land reforms
- stay of order
- administrative law
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2580 of 2026
======================================================
Md. Razak @ Md. Razzak Miyan Son of Md. Salim @ Salim Miyan,
Resident of Village- Bangaon, Ward No. 11, Masjid Tola, P.S.- Bangaon,
District- Saharsa.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The Collector/District Magistrate, Saharsa.
3. The Land Reform Deputy Collector, Saharsa.
4. The Circle Officer, Kahra Anchal, District- Saharsa.
5. Md. Arsad, Son of Md. Nasir Uddin @ Md. Nasir Uddin, Resident of
Village- Bangaon, Ward No. 11/07, P.S.- Bangaon, District- Saharsa.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Madhav Jha, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Addl. Advocate General (09)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 16-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
following relief(s):
“i. For setting aside the order dated
11.12.2025 passed by the Deputy Collector Land
Reforms, Saharsa in Mutation Appeal No.
496/2023-24 preferred by Respondent No. 5.
Whereby and whereunder the petitioner herein
Respondent No. 5 filed before the D.C.L.R.,
Saharsa for setting aside the order dated
30.12.2022 passed in Mutation Case No.
1126/2022-23 and order dated 30.12.2022 passed
Patna High Court CWJC No.2580 of 2026(2) dt.16-02-2026
2/3
in 1127/2022-23 passed by the Circle Officer
(Anchal Adhikari) Kahra has been allowed.
ii. For setting aside the order dated
03.03.2025 passed in Revision Case No. 08/2025
by the Collector / District Magistrate, Saharsa.
Whereby and whereunder learned Collector
directed the Deputy Collector Land Reform
Saharsa heard the matter afresh after hearing both
parties without setting aside the order dt.
15.01.2025 passed in Mutation Appeal No.
496/2023-24.
iii. For confirming the order dated
15.01.2025 passed in Mutation Appeal No.
496/2023-24 by the learned Land Reform Deputy
Collector, Sadar Saharsa wherein the learned
Court refused the appeal since a Title Suit No.
119/2016 is pending before competent Civil Court.
iv. For that the stay of the operation of
the order of the aforesaid as contained in
Annexure-P/5 to this petition till the disposal of the
present Writ petition.
v. For any other relief/reliefs to which
Patna High Court CWJC No.2580 of 2026(2) dt.16-02-2026
3/3
the petitioner may be found entitle to in the facts
and circumstances of the case.”
3. After some arguments, learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that it will suffice if the Collector, Saharsa
(respondent no. 2) looks into the matter and pass necessary
order.
4. Learned State counsel has no objection to it.
5. In that background, the writ petition stands
disposed of allowing the petitioner to agitate the matter before
the respondent no. 2, the Collector, Saharsa who shall be
noticing the parties and shall take the matter to its logical
conclusion at an earliest.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Adnan/-
U
Checking your session…