Patna High Court
Surendra Prasad YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- WITHDRAWN
Holding
The writ petition was dismissed because the petitioner has an alternative and effective remedy under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956.
Summary
Surendra Prasad Yadav filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State authorities to clear a 13‑decimal parcel of land belonging to a government primary school in Sakri, Madhubani, which he alleged was encroached upon by private respondents Nos. 6‑8. He also prayed for a perpetual injunction restraining those respondents from asserting any right over the land. The Court observed that the petitioner had an efficacious alternative remedy under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956, and therefore could pursue the matter through that statutory mechanism. Accordingly, the petitioner requested to withdraw the writ petition while retaining the liberty to approach the appropriate authority under the Act. The Court accepted the withdrawal and disposed of the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to seek relief under the Act.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition seeking mandamus and injunction is maintainable when an alternative statutory remedy is available under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956.
- Whether the court should entertain the petition or direct the petitioner to pursue the matter under the specific land encroachment legislation.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- mandamus
- land encroachment
- public land
- alternative remedy
- writ petition
- injunction
- Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3055 of 2026
======================================================
Surendra Prasad Yadav S/O Late Damodar Yadav, Resident of Village - Sakri
Yadav Tol (Incorrectly mentioned in the Aadhar Card as Sakuri), P.S.- Sakri,
District- Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of
Revenue and Land Reforms, Bihar, Patna.
2. The Collector cum District Magistrate, Madhubani.
3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Madhubani.
4. The Circle Officer, Pandaul, District- Madhubani.
5. The Block Education Officer, Pandaul, District- Madhubani
6. Lalit Yadav, S/O Late Lakshmi Yadav resident of Village- Sakri Yadav Tol,
P.S.-Sakri, District- Madhubani.
7. Lalan Yadav, S/O Late Subelal Yadav resident of Village- Sakri Yadav Tol,
P.S.-Sakri, District- Madhubani.
8. Raman Yadav, S/O Late Jagdish Yadav resident of Village- Sakri Yadav Tol,
P.S.-Sakri, District- Madhubani.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Suneil Kumar Thakur, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Advocate (5)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
2 02-04-2026 The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner
(Surendra Prasad Yadav) seeking for following reliefs:-
“i) For issuance of a writ in
the nature of Mandamus commanding
and directing the respondent-authorities
to clear the land of Rajkiya Prathmic
Vidyalaya Sakri (S.C.) under Block
Pandaul in the District of Madhubani
(‘said school’ for short) bearing Khesra
Patna High Court CWJC No.3055 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026
2/2
No. 436 (old) under Khata No. 258 (old),
Thana No. 102 measuring an area of 13
decimals situated at Mauza Sakri,
Pargana Hati, Circle Pandaul, in the
District of Madhubani (‘land in question’
for short) from encroachment made by the
private respondent nos. 06 to 08.
ii) For issuance of a perpetual
injunction and thereby perpetually
enjoining upon the private respondent
nos. 06 to 08 from assertion of their any
right upon the land in question of the said
school in future.”
2. Since the petitioner has got efficacious alternative
remedy under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956
(hereinafter referred to as, “Act, 1956”), learned counsel for the
petitioner seeks to withdraw the present writ petition with a
liberty to approach the concerned authority under the Act, 1956.
3. In view of such submission, this writ petition stands
disposed off with the liberty aforesaid.
(Sangam Kumar Sahoo, CJ)
(Harish Kumar, J)
shivank/-
U
Checking your session…