Patna High Court

Vikash Chandra @ Guddu BabaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 16 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: THE CHIEF JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR

Holding

The court held that the matter involves disputed questions of fact requiring determination by a civil suit, and consequently the writ relief sought cannot be granted.

Summary

The petitioners, chiefly Ashok Pandey, claimed ownership of a 12‑katha parcel of land (Plot No. 31, Khata No. 3) in Thawe, Gopalganj, based on deeds executed in 1958 and 1968 by former landlords. The State of Bihar contended that the land is classified as forest/jungle and was vested in the State under the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950, rendering the deeds inoperative. The petitioners sought a writ directing the forest and revenue officers not to disturb their possession and to order measurement and demarcation. The respondents argued that no mutation or jamabandi exists in the petitioners’ names and that the rent receipts are fabricated. The High Court held that the dispute involves factual questions of title and possession that must be resolved in a civil suit, not through writ jurisdiction, and therefore dismissed the writ petitions, directing the pending encroachment case under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act to be expedited.

Issues considered

Whether the High Court can grant relief in a writ petition concerning disputed title and possession of land.
Whether the deeds of conveyance executed in 1958 and 1968 confer valid title over the land claimed by the petitioners.
Whether the land in question is forest/jungle vested in the State under the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950.

Legislation cited

Subjects

land title
forest land
writ jurisdiction
civil suit
Bihar Land Reforms Act
public land encroachment
possession
deed of conveyance

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5159 of 2025
======================================================
Vikash Chandra @ Guddu Baba S/o Late Ramashray Prasad Resident of
Mohalla- Indrapuri, Road No.- 12, P.O.- Keshari Nagar, P.S.- Patliputra,
District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Environment, Forest and Climate Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Additional Chief Secretary, Revenue and Land Reform Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department, Bihar, Patna.
5. The Chief Forest Conservator Officer, Bihar, Patna.
6. The Divisional Commissioner, Saran, Chhapara.
7. The District Magistrate, Gopalganj.
8. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Gopalganj.
9. The Divisional Forest Officer, Gopalganj.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 6430 of 2022
======================================================
Ashok Pandey Son of Devnandan Pandey Resident of Village- Chitu Tola,
P.S.- Thawe, District- Gopalganj. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Divisional Commissioner, Saran, Bihar.
3. The District Magistrate, Gopalganj, Bihar.
4. The District Forest Officer, Gopalganj, Bihar.
5. The Sub Divisional Officer, Gopalganj, Bihar.
6. The Circle Officer, Thawe, Gopalganj, Bihar.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 5159 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vikash Chandra @ Guddu Baba ( In Person )
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Advocate General
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 6430 of 2022)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Setu Prateek, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sajid Salim Khan, SC-25
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Patna High Court CWJC No.5159 of 2025 dt.16-03-2026
2/11

(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

Date : 16-03-2026

CWJC No. 6430 of 2022

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner

Ashok Pandey with a prayer seeking a direction upon the

respondent authorities specifically to respondent no. 4 and 6 not

to disturb the peaceful possession of the petitioner over his

purchased land having an area 12 of katha of Plot No. 31, Khata

No. 03 situated in Mauza Thawe without proper measurement,

as directed by the respondent no. 5 in case no. 713/2020-21 vide

order dated 24.08.2021; in a proceeding under section 147 of the

Criminal Procedure Code and for grant of any other suitable

relief/reliefs for which the petitioner is found to be entitled.

2. The case of the petitioner, in short, is that the land

under Khata No. 3, Plot No. 31 has been recorded in the name of

ex-landlord, namely, Maharaja Guru Mahadev Ashram Prasad

Shahi Bahadur having a total area of 47.5 acres. The heir and the

legal representative of recorded tenant, namely, Maharaja

Bahadur Gopeshwar Prasad Shahi executed a registered deed of

conveyance in favour of the father of the petitioner for an area

of 12 Katha, in the aforesaid Plot No. 31, on payment of

consideration amount of Rs. 2400/- on 18.08.1958 and

accordingly, the father of the petitioner came in peaceful
Patna High Court CWJC No.5159 of 2025 dt.16-03-2026
3/11

cultivating possession over the same since the date of execution

of deed and after his death, the petitioner with other family

members are continuing in peaceful possession having valid

legal right, title and interest.

3. It is the further case of the petitioner that the widow

of the said Maharaja, namely, Maharani Durgeshwari Shahi

executed another sale deed on 19.04.1968 for an area of 1 Bigha

and 12 Katha in favour of the petitioner and seven other persons

on payment of consideration amount of Rs. 1600/- and

accordingly, the purchaser came in peaceful possession over the

same and their names have been recorded in record of rights

adjusting the area from record standing in the name of vendor,

namely, Maharani Durgeshwari Shahi. The recorded tenant on

purchase is making payment of the rent to the State of Bihar, in

whose favour Jamabandi No. 05 has been created and getting

rent receipt.

4. The further case of the petitioner that when the deed

of conveyance executed in favour of the father of the petitioner

was found missing, on the request of the petitioner, the

authorized representative of Maharaja Bahadur of Hathwa

executed a deed of disclaimer dated 07.12.2020 in favour of

petitioner. But after the said disclaimer, the petitioner anyhow
Patna High Court CWJC No.5159 of 2025 dt.16-03-2026
4/11

able to locate the original deed. However, the petitioner’s father

nor the petitioner earlier moved before the revenue authorities

for mutation of their names.

5. The petitioner, being the rightful owner of the said

land, when he started construction of residential house over the

purchased land, all on a sudden the Officers of District Forest

Office, Gopalganj came to the spot and raised objection to such

construction, for which legal notices were sent to the respondent

no. 4 and 6 by the petitioner to provide all the legal papers and

to specify the fact that on what basis they have objected in

making construction by the petitioner, but no reply was given.

6. At the behest of the petitioner, a proceeding has

been initiated under Section 147 of the Cr.P.C. In the said

proceeding, notices were issued to the respondent no. 4 and 6,

who appeared and stated that out of total area of 47.5 acres of

Plot No. 31, an area of 31.75 acres has been transferred to

respondent no. 4 for construction of Eco Park and after hearing

the parties, the matter was disposed off vide order dated

24.08.2021, with a direction to the respondent no. 6 to make

spot inquiry and to get proper measurement upon verification of

documents, after deciding whether the land executed in favour

of the petitioners and others are part of land transferred in favour
Patna High Court CWJC No.5159 of 2025 dt.16-03-2026
5/11

of Forest Department or not.

7. The petitioner filed an application before the

respondent no. 6 requesting to take measurement of the disputed

land and for demarcation of the same. But the respondent no. 6

sat over the matter and no action was taken and there was no

measurement and demarcation of the land of the petitioner and

the respondent no. 4 in collusion with respondent no. 6 tried to

dispossess the petitioner from his rightful land.

8. It is the further case of the petitioner that the

petitioner is being forcefully compelled to go away from his

rightful land by the actions of the respondent authorities and, as

such, he is likely to suffer irreparable loss and injury. Therefore,

the present writ petition was filed seeking the aforesaid relief(s).

9. Upon issuance of notice, the respondent nos. 3, 5

and 6 filed a counter affidavit, wherein it is stated as follows:-

“6. That in reply to the
statement made in paragraph no. 4 of the
writ petition, it is submitted that Plot no.
31 under Khata no. 03 in village Thawe,
Thana no. 121 is recorded as
Gairmajaruwa malik jungle in R.S
khatiyan area 47.05 acres. The land was
under custody of Ex-landlord, Hathwa
Estate, but after vesting of Estate and
after coming enforce of Bihar Land
Reforms Act, 1950, the same was vested
in Bihar State. And the Bihar state has
became custodian of the land and the
jungle and use the same as sairat due to
Patna High Court CWJC No.5159 of 2025 dt.16-03-2026
6/11

Ramnavmi Mela, in Thawe.
7. That in reply to the
statement made in paragraph no. 4 of the
writ petition, it is submitted that since the
land in question was under the ownership
of Bihar State as Jungle (Forest) and
Sairat, which is under the control and
under possession right from the day of
vesting of the Estate. Therefore, the said
Maharaja Bahadur Gopeshwar Prasad
Shahi had no legal authority to existing
any deed of conveyance to any one
regarding plot no. 31. Hence, the alleged
deed of conveyance dated 18.08.1958 was
seems to be in operative documents and
that had not create any legal right to the
father of the petitioner. And the father of
the petitioner had not come in possession
of the land for any movement.
8. That in reply to the
statement made in paragraph no. 6 of the
writ petition, it is submitted that the Plot
no. 31 under khata no. 03 of village
Thawe, Thana no.121 was already vested
in State of Bihar after enforcement of
Land Reforms Act. Therefore the widow of
Ex-land Lord namely Maharani
Durgeshwari Shahi, had no authority to
execute, sale deed in favor of the
petitioner on 19.04.1968,. Therefore the
alleged sale deed was inoperative
document and on the basis of the same no
possession was made over the land in
question.
9. That in reply to the
statement made in paragraph no. 7 of the
writ petition, it is submitted that neither
the name of the father of the petitioner
nor the name of the petitioner was ever
mutated in sirista of State Government
and no jamabandi was created in the
name of the father of the petitioner nor in
Patna High Court CWJC No.5159 of 2025 dt.16-03-2026
7/11

the name of the petitioner. Therefore the
alleged rent receipts file by the petitioner
as Annexure 4, 4/1 and 4/2 of the writ
petition seems to be fabricated
documents. That further it is submitted
that as per report of the Anchal Adhikari,
Thawe, letter no. 999 dated 16.08.2022
no Jamabandi no. 05 was ever created in
the name of any person as per Register-ll.
Further it is also reported that 31.20 acre
is already transferred to the Forest
Department for Eco Park and 4r decimal
land was already purposed for
construction of Home Guard Building.
10. That it is further submitted
that the Department of the Revenue and
Land Reforms, Bihar Patna vide Memo
no. 06-/खा० म० गोपालगं ज 01/2018-1031-
(6)/रा०, पटना-15, ददनांक 06.08.2019 had
confirmed the allocation of the land for
Eco Park.
11. That in reply to the
statement made in paragraph no. 8 of the
writ petition, it is submitted that the
alleged deed of disclaimer dated
17.12.2020 is nor the registered deed
neither the alleged deed was executed in
proper manner and the stamp on which
the said recital of disclaimer had typed
was purchased by Ashok Pandey, which
goes to show that the petitioner had
created the said deed al his own.
Therefore the said deed had not created
any Legal Sanctity. Therefore it is for no
relevance.
12. That the statement made in
paragraph no. 9 of the writ petition, it is
submitted that the petitioner never came
in possession of the land for any
movement of the time. Therefore the
averment made in this Para is not true,
hence it is denied.
Patna High Court CWJC No.5159 of 2025 dt.16-03-2026
8/11

13. That in reply to the
statement made in paragraph no. 7 of the
writ petition the petitioner had filed a
petition U/S 147 Cri.P.C. before the Court
of S.D.M. Gopalganj in view to creating a
dispute and creating document on the
land in question in shape of easementary
right over the land in question but the
S.D.M. Gopalganj by passing order dated
24.08.2021 dismissed the Case.
15. That in reply to the
statement made in paragraph no. 12 of
the writ petition, it is submitted that the
construction work of Home Guard
building was already completed, the office
and entire establishment of Home Guard
is running in the said building and the
rest part of the land is under the
possession of Forest Department and
under sairat in which the Ramnavmi Mela
and daily gathering of people for worship
of Goddess Shri Durga Mandir, Thawe is
assembled.”

10. After going through the counter affidavit filed on

behalf of the respondent nos. 3, 5 and 6, we find that there are

disputed questions of fact and not only the State has raised

objection about the legality of the deed of conveyance, which

was executed by Maharaja Bahadur Gopeshwar Prasad Shahi

but also by Maharani Durgeshwari Shahi, who allegedly

executed the sale deed in favour of the petitioner.

It is also the stand of the State that the rent receipts are

all fabricated documents and after the vesting of the Estate and

coming into force of Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950, the land
Patna High Court CWJC No.5159 of 2025 dt.16-03-2026
9/11

was vested in Bihar State and the Bihar State has became

custodian of the land and the jungle.

11. It is trite law that the question involving right, title

and interest of the parties with respect to a property, which

requires elaborate examination of evidence should be left to be

determined through a Civil Suit. The Hon’ble Supreme Court

time and again observed that the High Court should not

ordinarily enter upon determination of question of facts while

exercising writ jurisdiction, which requires extensive

examination of documentary or oral evidence to establish the

rights of the parties, for which it is claimed for.

12. It would be worth benefiting to take note of the

decisions rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of

Union of India & Ors. Vs. Ghaus Mohammad reported in

AIR 1961 SC 1526, wherein the Court held that the question

involving disputed facts should be determined through a regular

Civil Suit and not in a writ petition. Further, in case of State of

Rajasthan Vs. Bhawani Singh & Ors., reported in 1993 Supp

(1) SCC 306, the Honble Supreme Court ruled that disputes of

ownership or title cannot be satisfactorily adjudicated in writ

proceedings.

13. In view of the submissions raised that the deed of
Patna High Court CWJC No.5159 of 2025 dt.16-03-2026
10/11

conveyance did not create any legal right in favour of the father

of the petitioner nor the alleged sale deed gives any legal right to

the petitioner as it is said to be an in-operative document, we are

of the view that all these aspects cannot be adjudicated while

exercising writ jurisdiction by this Court. In such a situation, the

relief(s) sought for by the petitioner, in this writ petition cannot

be granted. It is open to the petitioner to seek appropriate

remedy before the appropriate forum.

14. It is made clear that we have not expressed any

opinion on the merits of the case. Accordingly, the CWJC No.

6430 of 2022 stands disposed off primarily on the ground that

the matter involves disputed questions of fact requiring

elaborate examination of evidence and documents.

CWJC No. 5159 of 2025

15. Since we have disposed off CWJC No. 6430 of

2022, which has been filed by one Ashok Pandey and in

paragraph no. 6 of the counter affidavit, which has been filed by

the Divisional Forest Officer, Gopalganj it is stated that there is

encroachment over the land in question and Case No. 14/2017-

18 has been filed as per the Bihar Public Land Encroachment

Act, 1956 by the Circle Officer, Thawe to remove the

encroachment, no further adjudication is required in this matter.
Patna High Court CWJC No.5159 of 2025 dt.16-03-2026
11/11

16. However, we take note of the fact that since the

encroachment case is of the year 2017-18 and, in the meantime,

more than 8 years have passed, the concerned authorities shall

do well to expedite the disposal of such case in accordance with

law, preferably within a period of three months, from the date of

production of a certified copy of this order.

17. Accordingly, the CWJC No. 5159 of 2025 stands

disposed off.

(Sangam Kumar Sahoo, CJ)

(Harish Kumar, J)
shivank/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 19.03.2026
Transmission Date NA

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…