Patna High Court
Rajeev NayakversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court held that the disputed order must be examined by the Deputy Collector of Land Records, who should verify the title and pass a reasoned order, and therefore disposed of the writ petition without granting the reliefs sought.
Summary
The petitioner, Rajeev Nayak, filed a writ petition challenging a letter dated 17 October 2023 issued by the Circle Officer, Pandaul, which declared certain parcels of land in Madhubani district as belonging to the Mahatma (MATH) despite earlier revenue records showing the land in the names of the petitioner and his relatives. The petitioner sought certiorari to quash the Circle Officer's order, mandamus directing protection of his land, and a restraining order against further action. The court examined the petition and noted that the petitioner had already approached the Deputy Collector of Land Records (D.C.L.R.) but no action had been taken. The bench directed the D.C.L.R. to obtain the relevant records, verify the title, and issue a reasoned order within six weeks, emphasizing the need for a hearing to all interested parties. No relief was granted in the writ petition; instead, the matter was referred back to the revenue authorities for factual determination. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of without granting the reliefs sought.
Issues considered
- Whether the Circle Officer's order declaring the land as belonging to MATH is illegal, malafide, and capricious.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of certiorari to quash the Circle Officer's order.
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing protection of the petitioner's land.
- Whether the respondent authorities should be restrained from acting on the contested order pending resolution.
Subjects
- land dispute
- revenue records
- certiorari
- mandamus
- writ petition
- malafide order
- Bihar land reforms
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2724 of 2026
======================================================
Rajeev Nayak Son of Late Dhruva Prasad Nayak, Resident of Village-
Bhagwatipur, P.S.- Pandaul, District- Madhubani, at present residing at 2nd
floor, east of Kailash, Sriniwaspuri, East of Kailash, Phase- 1, P.S.- Amar
Colony, South Delhi, 110065.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar represented through Principal Secretary, Revenue and
Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate, Madhubani.
3. Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Madhubani.
4. District Sub Registrar, Madhubani.
5. Circle Officer, Pandaul Madhubani.
6. Revenue Officer, Bhagwatipur, Pandaul Madhubani.
7. Sanjay Kumar Nayak, Son of Late Dhurv Prasad Nayak, Resident of
Village- Bhagwatipur, P.S.- Pandaul, District- Madhubani.
8. Ravindra Nayak, Son of Lajte Dhurv Prasad Nayak, Resident of Village-
Bhagwatipur, P.S.- Pandaul, District- Madhubani.
9. Indu Nayakain, Wife of Late Dhrav Prasad Nayak, Resident of Village-
Bhagwatipur, P.S.- Pandaul, District- Madhubani.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Gopal Jha, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Pankaj Kumar, SC 12
Mr.Anuj Kumar, AC to SC 12
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 19-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
2. The petitioner in paragraph no. 1 of the present writ
petition has sought inter alia following relief(s), which is
reproduced hereinafter:-
“To hold and declare the order impugned contained
in Annexure-P-4, as malafide, illegal, capricious and
colourable exercise of power, as well as bad in the
eye of law because the same has been passed without
Patna High Court CWJC No.2724 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
2/3
applying the judicial mind and without considering
the materials available on records.
ii. To issue a writ in the nature of certiorari for the
quashing of letter no.1784, dated 17.10.2023
(annexure -P-4), by which Circle Officer. Pandaul
(Respondent No. -5) has arrived at conclusion that
the land situated in Mauza Bhagwatipur. P. S.
Pandaul, District - Madhubani bearing Thana no.176,
Khata no.-337-old (new-430) Khesra No.-968 old
(new-1237), measuring an area of 1 Katha, 4 Dhur. 7
Dhurki of land which is in the name of petitioner and
land measuring 1 katha 15 Dhur, 1 katha 4 Dhur and
1 Katha 7 Dhur in the name of Performa Respondent
Nos. 7. 8 and 9 respectively, seems to be the land of
MATH, even though in the Revisional Survey land in
question was in the name of fore fathers of the
petitioner and Performa Respondent No. 7. 8. & 9.
iii. To issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari for the
quashing of order by which the land of the petitioner
and Performa Respondents has been declared as land
of MATH, and also for a direction to the respondent
authorities to produce the paper on which basis they
have come to this conclusion.
iv. To issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus for a
direction to the respondent authorities to protect the
nature of the land of the petitioner and Performa
Respondents, situated in Mauza-Bhagwtipur, bearing
Thana no.176, Khata no.-337-old (new -430) Khesra
No.-968 old (new-1237).
v. To restrain the respondent authorities to act upon,
on letter no. 1784, dated 17.10.2023. till the
pendency of the present writ application.
vi Any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner
and Performa Respondents are legally and validly
entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner informs this Court that for the relief(s) as prayed for
Patna High Court CWJC No.2724 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
3/3
in the present writ petition, the petitioner has already filed an
application before the D.C.L.R., Madhubani, who since the
date of filing of the application has not taken any action over
the said application of the petitioner.
4. The D.C.L.R., Madhubani is directed to call for
the records relating to the land, in question, from the concerned
Circle Office and verify whether the ‘Math’ has its title over
the disputed land as mentioned in paragraph no.1 (ii) of the
writ petition and if the D.C.L.R. finds that the revenue records
gives different person’s name then he shall proceed to pass a
reasoned order on the basis of the information given in the
application filed by the petitioner in accordance with law
within a period of six weeks from the date of communication
of this order.
5. It is made clear that due opportunity of hearing
must be afforded to all concerned and interested parties before
passing any order.
6. With the above observation/direction, the present
writ petition stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
chn/-
U
Checking your session…