Patna High Court
Nalin Bhushan SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court directed the Collector, Rohtas to order the Circle Officer to demarcate the land, fix a date for the proceedings in the presence of parties, and complete the process within sixty days, thereby granting the writ of mandamus and stay.
Summary
The petition filed by Nalin Bhushan Singh sought a writ of mandamus directing the Circle Officer of Dinara to demarcate specific plots of land for which he had paid the requisite fee, and to stay the construction of a boundary wall being erected by private respondents in alleged collusion with the Circle Officer. The petitioner alleged that despite submitting the application and fee, the Circle Officer failed to act, thereby infringing his right, title and interest in the land. The State argued that once a petition is filed, the administrative authority must see it to logical conclusion. The Court examined whether the administrative inaction warranted a mandamus and stay, and held that the Collector must order the Circle Officer to fix a date, conduct the demarcation in the presence of parties, and complete the process within sixty days, recording any non‑appearance. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed with these directions.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued directing the Circle Officer to demarcate the land in question.
- Whether the Court can stay the construction of a boundary wall by private respondents acting in connivance with the Circle Officer.
- Whether the administrative authority’s failure to act on a duly filed application constitutes a jurisdictional lapse justifying judicial intervention.
Subjects
- land demarcation
- writ of mandamus
- administrative law
- stay order
- boundary wall
- public officer
- civil writ jurisdiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2846 of 2026
======================================================
Nalin Bhushan Singh Son of Late Harinarayan Singh, Resident of Village and
P.O.- Mednipur, Police Station- Dinara, District- Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through District Magistrate-cum- Collector, Rohtas,
Sasaram.
2. The District Magistrate, Rohtas, Sasaram.
3. The Additional District Magistrate, Rohtas, Sasaram.
4. The Superintendent of Police, Rohtas, Sasaram.
5. The District Collector Land Reforms, Bikramganj, Rohtas, Sasaram.
6. The Sub Divisional Officer, Dinara, Rohtas, Sasaram.
7. The Block Development Officer, Dinara, Rohtas, Sasaram.
8. The Circle Officer, Dinara, Rohtas, Sasaram.
9. The Station House Officer, Dinara, Rohtas, Sasaram.
10. Prem Ranjan Singh, Son of Late Harinarayan Singh, Resident of Village and
P.O.- Mednipur, Police Station- Dinara, District- Rohtas.
11. Rajiv Ranjan Singh, Son of Late Harinarayan Singh, Resident of Village and
P.O.- Mednipur, Police Station- Dinara, District- Rohtas.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Niranjan Kumar, Advocate
: Mr. Rohan Kumar, Advocate
: Ms. Dikshika Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Government Pleader (23)
: Mr. Arvind Kumar, AC to GP-23
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 19-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
grant of following relief(s):
“(i) for issuance of appropriate writ in
the nature of Mandamus for directing and
commanding the responsible Respondent
Patna High Court CWJC No.2846 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
2/4
Authorities, specially Respondent No. 8 i.e.
Circle Officer, Dinara, Rohtas, Sasaram to
demarcate the land in question bearing Khata
No. 359, Plot Nos. 501. 502, 503, 504, 505, 514,
519 and 520, Thana No. 31, Mauza- Mednipur,
Thana Dinara appertaining to total Area-108
Dismal under the District of Rohtas, for which,
this petitioner has already paid the requisite fee
i.e. Rs. 2000/- (Rupees Two Thousand Only) to
the office of Circle Officer, Dinara, Rohtas vide
Receipt No. 812491 dated 09.04.2025 and
restore the same in its original position in
accordance with its entitlement as per the
documents, by which, the petitioner has interest,
right, title over the said land.
(ii) for staying the construction of
boundary wall forcibly making over the
construction over the said piece of land
belonging to this petitioner by the Private
Respondents in connivance with the Respondent
No. 8 i.e. the Circle Officer, Dinara, Rohtas,
Sasaram having some pecuniary interest, which
Patna High Court CWJC No.2846 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
3/4
is best known to them.
(iii) and also for further issuance of
any other writ/ writs, order/ orders, direction/
directions for which the petitioner is legally
entitled to.”
3. The matter relates to a piece of land under Mauza
Mednipur, Thana-Dinara in the district of Rohtas. The
contention in the writ petition is that despite making application
and submitting requisites, the Circle Officer, Dinara, Rohtas
(respondent no.8) has failed to proceed and take the matter to its
logical conclusion.
4. The different document shows the inability of the
Circle Officer, Dinara, Rohtas to take the matter to its logical
conclusion on frivolous ground.
5. Learned State counsel submits that once the
petition has been filed, it has to be taken to its logical
conclusion.
6. In that background, with the consent of the parties,
the writ petition is disposed of directing the Collector, Rohtas,
Sasaram to direct in turn the Circle Officer, Dinara, Rohtas
(respondent no.8) to take appropriate steps, fix a date and in the
presence of the parties, take the matter to its logical conclusion,
Patna High Court CWJC No.2846 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
4/4
if any of the party failed to appear, the same be recorded and in
any case the entire process has to be completed in next sixty
days from today.
7. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid
observation.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U
Checking your session…