Patna High Court
Lakhan ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner must first pursue the administrative remedy by filing a fresh representation before the Collector, and therefore the writ petition is disposed without granting mandamus.
Summary
Petitioner Lakhan Manjhi, a 77‑year‑old senior citizen, filed a writ petition seeking mandamus to compel the State of Bihar and various officials to remove an illegal RCC Dhalal (road) constructed over his claimed raiyati land and to remove encroachment on a public way, along with disciplinary action against officials and compensation. The petitioner alleged that despite a representation filed on 9 January 2026 with the Collector, no action was taken and the road was constructed by the contractor and sub‑contractor. The Court noted that a coordinate bench had earlier directed the State to file an affidavit, which was not complied with. The Court held that the petitioner must first file a fresh representation before the Collector within four weeks, after which the matter will be considered. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed without granting the reliefs sought.
Issues considered
- Whether the construction of the RCC Dhalal over the petitioner's land is illegal and warrants a writ of mandamus for its removal.
- Whether the encroachment on the public way can be ordered to be removed and replaced with a road on the appropriate land.
- Whether disciplinary or legal action against erring officials can be directed by the Court.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to compensation for the alleged illegal construction.
- Whether the petitioner has exhausted the required administrative remedy before approaching the Court.
Subjects
- mandamus
- illegal encroachment
- land rights
- administrative remedy
- senior citizen
- public way
- RCC Dhalal
- compensation
- disciplinary action
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4104 of 2026
======================================================
Lakhan Manjhi Son of Late Jodhi Manjhi, Resident of Village- Pura,
Pratappur, Police Station- Wazirganj, District- Gaya, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue
and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate, Gaya, Bihar.
3. The Additional District Collector, Gaya, Bihar.
4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Wazirganj, Gaya, Bihar.
5. The Circle Officer, Wazirganj, Gaya, Bihar.
6. The Proprietor of Maa Netual Enterprises (Contractor), Mona Kumari, W/o-
Kunal Kumar, R/O Village- Bhadseni, P.s.- Hisua, District- Nawada.
7. Pintu Singh (Sub-contractor), S/O- Paras Singh, R/O Adhma, P.S.-
Wazirganj, District- Gaya, Bihar.
8. Vinod Kumar, Son of Late Brahmedev Das, Resident of Village- Pratappur,
P.S.- Wazirganj, District- Gaya, Bihar.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shankar Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Manish Kumar, GP (4)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 28-04-2026 Heard Mr.Shankar Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Manish Kumar, leraned G.P.-04.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
following relief/s:
(i) for Issuing a writ of Mandamus
commanding the respondents to remove the
illegal RCC Dhalal constructed over the
Patna High Court CWJC No.4104 of 2026(3) dt.28-04-2026
2/4
petitioner's land bearing Maula Pratapur,
Thana No. 397, Khata No. 29, Plot No. 1547
& 1548 or award compensation for the
same;
(ii) for issuing a writ of Mandamus directing
the respondents to remove encroachment
from the public way bearing Mauja-
Pratapur Thana No. 597, Khata No. 123,
Plot No. 1545, in accordance with law and
thereafter, to do RCC Dhalal on it instead of
petitioner's land;
(iii) for issuing a writ of Mandamus
directing the respondents to take appropriate
disciplinary/legal action against erring
officials responsible for illegal construction
of public way on the petitioner's land;
(iv) for awarding compensation of the cost of
litigation to the petitioner;
(v) for directing the respondents to fix
responsibility upon erring official and take
disciplinary action for dereliction of duty;
(vi) for issuing any other appropriate
Patna High Court CWJC No.4104 of 2026(3) dt.28-04-2026
3/4
writ/order/direction that this Hon'ble Court
may deem fit and proper in the interest of
justice.
3. At the outset, learned State counsel has pointed out
that the petitioner has already preferred a representation before
the Collector, Gayaji (respondent no.4) bringing on record some
facts of the case.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
despite the representation filed on 09.01.2026, neither he has
been noticed nor an order passed and in between the respondent
nos. 6 and 7 constructed a road over the land which the
petitioner claims it to be raiyati land, accordingly, a petition was
preferred before the respondent authorities including the
Collector, Gayaji.
5. It is unfortunate that no decision is taken forcing
the petitioner to approach the Patna High Court. This Court has
also taken note of the fact that the petitioner is 77 years old and
a senior citizen.
6. In that background, earlier a Coordinate Bench of
this Court had directed the State-respondent to file an affidavit
vide an order dated 31.03.2026 but today on call, it has been
informed that statement of facts has not been received.
Patna High Court CWJC No.4104 of 2026(3) dt.28-04-2026
4/4
7. In that background, instead of keeping the writ
petition pending or imposing cost upon the respondents, it
would be appropriate that the petitioner shall file a fresh
representation before the Collector, Gayaji (respondent no.02) in
next four weeks.
8. Learned State counsel submits that if such
petition/representation is preferred in next for weeks by the
petitioner, the same shall be taken to its logical conclusion after
noticing/hearing the parties at an earliest preferably by the end
of this year.
9. Needless to add that the construction which is
taken place over the land in question will be subject to the final
order passed by the Collector, Gayaji.
10. The writ petition is disposed of with the
observation.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/-
U
Checking your session…