Patna High Court
Ram Nath ThakurversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court held that, since the petitioner was free to pursue the alternative statutory remedy, the writ petition could not be entertained and was therefore disposed of.
Summary
The petitioner, Ram Nath Thakur, filed a writ petition in the Patna High Court challenging an order dated 4 May 2023 issued by the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Pupari, which, under Section 4(1)(e) and (h) of the Bihar Land Dispute Resolution Act, granted possession of a 4‑decimal land parcel to the private respondent, Tej Narayan Thakur. The petitioner sought a certiorari to quash that order and also directed the respondent officials to resolve a boundary dispute. The State argued that the petitioner had an alternative statutory remedy and that the petition was premature. The Court observed that the petitioner was prepared to pursue the alternative remedy before the appropriate authority and, in the interest of procedural propriety, declined to interfere with the administrative order. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of without granting any relief.
Issues considered
- Whether the order passed by the Deputy Collector under the Bihar Land Dispute Resolution Act can be quashed by a writ of certiorari
- Whether the petitioner must exhaust alternative statutory remedies before approaching the High Court
Subjects
- land dispute
- certiorari
- quashing order
- alternative remedy
- Bihar Land Dispute Resolution Act
- civil writ jurisdiction
- limitation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5503 of 2024
======================================================
Ram Nath Thakur S/o Late Arjim Thakur Resident of Village and P.O.-Balha
Maksuda, Anchal-Pupari District- Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue
and Land Reforms, Bihar, Patna.
2. The Divisional Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur.
3. The District Magistrate Cum Collector, Sitamarhi.
4. The Additional Collector, Sitamarhi.
5. The Sub-Divisional, Officer, Pupari, District-Sitamarhi.
6. The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Pupari, District-Sitamarhi.
7. The Circle Officer, Pupari, District-Sitamarhi.
8. The S.H.O., Pupari Police Station, Pupari, District-Sitamarhi.
9. Tej Narayan Thakur S/o Chandrashekhar Thakur Resident of Vilalge-Balha
Maksudan, P.S.-Pupari, District-Sitamarhi.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hans Lal Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Standing Counsel 01
: Ms. Babita Kumari, AC to SC-1
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 05-05-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
grant of following relief(s):
“(i) to issue an appropriate order/s,
direction/s including a writ preferably in the
nature of certiorari for quashing of the order
dated 4.5.2023 passed in Bihar Land Dispute
Resolution Case No. 79 of 2022-23 passed by the
Patna High Court CWJC No.5503 of 2024(2) dt.05-05-2026
2/3
learned Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Pupari
whereby and whereunder in exercise of powers
conferred under Section 4 (1) (e) and (h) of the
Bihar Land Dispute Resolution Act road allowed
the said case in favour of the private respondent
and directed to deliver the possession of land
measuring 4 dec. appertaining Thana No. 75,
Khata No. 1153, Khesra No. 1257 situated in
Mauza-Balha Maksudan P.S.-Pupari, District-
Sitamarhi.
(ii) to direct the respondent no. 6 to
decide the boundary dispute between the parties
and get the land measured by Anchal Amin as
mentioned above in as per the averment made in
para-7 of the plaint of BLDR Case No. 79 of
2022-23.
(iii) to any other relief/s to which the
petitioner may be found entitled in the facts and
circumstances of the case.”
3. After some argument, learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that he shall be taking alternative remedy in
accordance with law before the appropriate authority.
Patna High Court CWJC No.5503 of 2024(2) dt.05-05-2026
3/3
4. Granting said liberty, the writ petition is disposed
of.
5. If any petition is preferred in next four weeks, the
authority shall take into account that the petitioner was pursuing
remedy before the Patna High Court while dealing with the
limitation petition.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.