Patna High Court
Raj Kumar RamversusThe State of Bihar and Ors
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The petition was dismissed because the petitioner failed to establish that he is a landless person, and therefore the settlement order could not be set aside.
Summary
The petitioner, Raj Kumar Ram, claimed to be a landless person possessing 0.5 decimal of land and sought a writ to set aside a 28 November 2007 order that settled two decimals of land (Plot No.645, Khata No.271) in the name of respondents 6‑6.4. The land had originally been allotted to a landless applicant, Prayan Ram, by the Circle Officer. The petitioner argued that he too should be allowed to file a representation for land allocation. The High Court examined the records and found that the petitioner had not established his status as a landless person. Consequently, the Court held that without such proof the petition could not succeed and disposed of the writ petition, noting that any representation by the petitioner should be considered only if he can satisfy the authority of his landless status.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is a landless person eligible for land allocation under land reform provisions.
- Whether the order dated 28‑11‑2007 settling the land in the name of respondents 6‑6.4 can be set aside by a writ.
- Whether the petitioner can file a representation for land allocation in the absence of proof of landlessness.
Subjects
- land settlement
- writ petition
- landless person
- land reforms
- civil writ jurisdiction
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4850 of 2019
======================================================
Raj Kumar Ram S/o Rama Shankar Ram Vill.- Gorashra, P.o. and P.s.-
Ramgarh, Distt.- Kaimur (Bhabua)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. The District Magistrate Kaimur at Bhabua
3. Sub Divisional Officer Mohania, Kaimur at Bhabua
4. Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Mohania, Kaimur at Bhabua
5. Circle Officer Ramgarh, Kaimur at Bhabua
6.1. Ramashish Ram Son of Late Parayan Ram, R/o - Village - Gorasara, P.O. -
P.S. Ramgarh, District- Kaimur (Bhabua).
6.2. Ramniwas Ram Son of Late Parayan Ram, R/o - Village - Gorasara, P.O. -
P.S. Ramgarh, District- Kaimur (Bhabua).
6.3. Ravikant Ram Son of Late Parayan Ram, R/o - Village - Gorasara, P.O. -
P.S. Ramgarh, District- Kaimur (Bhabua).
6.4. Dablu Ram Son of Late Parayan Ram, R/o - Village - Gorasara, P.O. - P.S.
Ramgarh, District- Kaimur (Bhabua).
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Radha Mohan Pandey, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Md. Khursid Alam ( Aag12 )
For Respondent no. 6 to 6.4 Mr. Rama Kant Ram, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
6 03-02-2026 Heard Mr. Radha Mohan Pandey, learned counsel for
the petitioner and the Mr. Rama Kant Ram for the respondent
nos. 06 to 6.4.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
following relief/s:
(i) for issuance of an appropriate writ, under
a direction for setting aside the order dated
Patna High Court CWJC No.4850 of 2019(6) dt.03-02-2026
2/3
28.11.2007 in land settlement case No. 18 of
2007-08 through which Anchaladhikari,
Ramgarh has recommended for settlement of
2 decimal land of Plot No. 645 Khata No.
271, of Mouza Garashra to DCLR, Bhabua,
who further forwarded for its approval to
Sub Divisional Officer, Bhabua for
settlement of land which has been settled in
the name of Respondent No. 6.
3. It is to be noted that the original respondent,
Prayan Ram was a landless person and on his application, the
Circle Officer, Ramgarh, Kaimur allotted two decimals of land
vide Khata No. 271, Kheshra no. 645, Thana-215 at Garashra
under Ramgarh Circle in the district of Kaimur. It is further to
be noted that the land is having an area of 8 decimals, the
petitioner who claims to be having possession of 0.5 decimal of
land challenged the said order.
4. The counter affidavit of the Circle Officer,
Ramgarh, Kaimur is on record and he has given reasons to
justify the order passed in question.
5. Paragraph-07 records that finally it was the
decision of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Mohania which led to
Patna High Court CWJC No.4850 of 2019(6) dt.03-02-2026
3/3
settlement of the land.
6. After some argument, learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that he too is a landless person though
presently having possession of the adjoining land and as such it
will suffice, if he is also allowed to file representation.
7. This Court has gone through the facts of the case
and the submissions of the parties and do not find anywhere that
the petitioner has recorded that he is a landless person.
However, if he is able to satisfy the authority that he is a
landless person, the representation preferred by him be
considered sympathetically.
8. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid
observation.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/-
U
Checking your session…