Patna High Court
Rajkishore ParitversusThe State Of Bihar and Ors
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The order dated 07‑01‑2015 passed by the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Hathua is quashed as it exceeded the authority’s jurisdiction.
Summary
The petitioner, Rajkishore Parit, has occupied a plot of land for over sixteen years and sought to quash an order dated 07‑01‑2015 issued by the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Hathua, which directed the Circle Officer to grant physical possession of the land to respondent No.5, Sahabuddin Ansari. The respondent had previously filed two land‑dispute applications before the same authority, which were dismissed on the ground that earlier orders only concerned measurement of the land and did not confer any right to possession. The court held that the Deputy Collector exceeded his jurisdiction by acting as a civil court and ordering possession, a function that can only be exercised by a competent civil court. Consequently, the 07‑01‑2015 order was quashed, and the parties were directed to approach the appropriate court for any further relief. The writ petition was thereafter disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Hathua had jurisdiction to direct physical possession of the disputed land.
- Whether the order dated 07‑01‑2015 is liable to be quashed on the ground of jurisdictional excess.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to continue possession of the land pending adjudication by a civil court.
- Whether a writ of mandamus is an appropriate remedy in the present circumstances.
Subjects
- land dispute
- possession
- jurisdiction
- quashing order
- writ of mandamus
- measurement of land
- civil court jurisdiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5008 of 2015
======================================================
Rajkishore Parit son of late Doma Parit R/o. vill. Chakarawa Khas, P.S
Bhorey, District Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar.
2. Collector- District Magistrate, Gopalganj
3. Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Hathua, District Gopalganj.
4. Circle Officer, Bhorey, Anchal Bhorey, District Gopalganj
5. Sahabuddin Ansari son of late Abdul Hakim resident of village Chakarawa
Kha, P.S Bhorey, District Gopalganj.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Chaubey, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. GP-2- Prashant Pratap
Mr. Asit Kumar Jha, AC to GP-2
For the Resp No. 5 : Mr. Nityanand Mishra, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 20-01-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
following relief(s):
“I. for quashing the order dated
07.01.2025 of Deputy Collector, Land Reforms,
Hathua, Gopalganj in connection with Bhumi
Vivad Vad Sankhya 70/2014-15 Sahabuddin
Ansari Vs. Sudhiram Parit and others;
II. for quashing the letter no. 117 dated
26.02.2015 of Circle Officer, Bhore, District
Patna High Court CWJC No.5008 of 2015(3) dt.20-01-2026
2/5
Gopalganj;
III. for issuance of writ of mandamus
commanding the respondent authority to allow
the petitioners to continue his possession as they
are using as residential house for more then
sixteen years to disputed land with respect to
khata no. 110, plot no. 229/2001 Rakaba 2 katha
15 dhur in mauja Chakarawa Khas;
IV. for issuance of such other
appropriate writ, order, direction which may
deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of this case for the ends of
justice.”
3. The matter relates to land [Khata No. 110, Khesra
No. 229 (Area 2 katha 15 dhur) in village, Chakarawa Khas
under Bhore Circle in the district of Gopalganj] which the
petitioner is using for his residence since last two decades.
4. The respondent no. 5 preferred a petition before
the DCLR, Hathua (respondent no. 3) in Land Dispute
Resolution Case No. 42/2012-13 which was disposed of on
03.09.2012 by the DCLR, Hathua directing the Circle Officer,
Bhore, Gopalganj to ensure measurement of the land between
Patna High Court CWJC No.5008 of 2015(3) dt.20-01-2026
3/5
the parties so that dispute comes to an end (annexure-2 to the
petition).
5. However, the respondent no. 5, being aggrieved,
again moved before the DCLR, Hathua which was disposed of
on 30.12.2013 and the concerned officer came to the
conclusion that earlier, order was only with regard to the
measurement of land and as such, he cannot move ahead by
directing the Revenue Authorities to ensure physical
possession to him (annexure-3 to the petition).
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, if
aggrieved, the respondent ought to have moved before a
competent Civil Court. Instead, he took a chance for the third
time by filing a land dispute case no. 70/2014-15 before the
same authority i.e. Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Hathua
and on 07.01.2015, though the concerned officer came to the
conclusion that it is mere repetition of the earlier applications
preferred, measurement has already been conducted, it went
beyond the earlier orders by directing the Circle Officer,
Bhore to ensure physical possession of the respondent no. 5 as
per the measurement so done on 28.12.2012 (annexure-4 to
the petition).
7. He submits that the same has to go as there was
Patna High Court CWJC No.5008 of 2015(3) dt.20-01-2026
4/5
no such direction in the earlier order dated 03.09.2012, a fact
recorded subsequently by the same office on 30.12.2013.
8. The Coordinate Bench while issuing notice to the
respondent no. 5 on 03.07.2015, granted status quo in the
present case. Today, the respondent no. 5 has appeared but no
reply has come on his behalf, though the State has filed its
counter-affidavit.
9. Entire facts have been recorded and the parties
have been heard. An order came to be passed on 03.09.2012
by which direction was given for measurement of the land.
Accordingly, on 28.12.2012, measurement took place and the
order stands complied. However, the respondent no. 5 again
moved before the concerned authority which was negated on
30.12.2013 holding that there was no order for giving physical
possession to him. However, in the third effort, he succeeded
in getting the order on 07.01.2015 in which direction was
issued for providing him physical possession.
10. Certainly, the Deputy Collector Land Reforms,
Hathua, Gopalganj exceeded his jurisdiction by taking up the
role of the competent Civil Court. Accordingly, order dated
07.01.2015 stands quashed. The parties are free to move
before appropriate authority/Court for the redressal of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.5008 of 2015(3) dt.20-01-2026
5/5
grievance if they so want.
11. Needless to add, any observation made at any
point of time in the present issue shall be overlooked by the
competent Court if the parties decide to file a petition before
it.
12. The writ petition stands disposed of.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Adnan/-
U
Checking your session…