Patna High Court
Budhu Yadav @ Budhu GopeversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court held that the petitioner must first file an application with the Circle Officer for mutation; the court will not order mutation ex parte.
Summary
The petitioner, Budhu Yadav, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Circle Officer, Bodh Gaya, to mutate his name on several parcels of land in Mauza Atiya, Gaya, based on a prior judgment and decree in Suit No. 5506/98/310/98. The petitioner alleged that the Circle Officer had failed to carry out the mutation despite his possession of the land. The court observed that the petitioner had never filed an application with the Circle Officer for mutation, which is a prerequisite for any administrative action. Consequently, the court directed the petitioner to submit a proper application for mutation to the Circle Officer and ordered that the officer act within one month of receipt. The writ petition was therefore disposed of, with the petitioner given liberty to approach the officer for the relief sought.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can directly order mutation of land without the petitioner first filing an application with the concerned revenue officer.
- Whether the petitioner is required to approach the Circle Officer before seeking judicial intervention for mutation of land.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Tenancy Act — s. 106
Subjects
- land mutation
- mandamus
- revenue law
- Bihar Tenancy Act
- civil writ jurisdiction
- property rights
- administrative procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6219 of 2022
======================================================
Budhu Yadav @ Budhu Gope Son of Late Kesho Yadav Resident of Village-
Atiya, Police Station- Bodh Gaya, District- Gaya. At present Pachhan,
Pachhan, Bodh Gaya, Koshila, Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue
and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Divisional Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya.
3. The District Magistrate-cum-Settlement Officer, Gaya.
4. The Additional Collector, Gaya.
5. The Sub Divisional Officer-cum-District Public Grievance Officer, Gaya,
District- Gaya.
6. The Department Collector, Land Reforms, Sadar Gaya, District- Gaya.
7. The Circle Officer, Bodh Gaya.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sajid Salim Khan (SC-25)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 26-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present writ application has been preferred for
grant of following relief(s):-
“(I). To issue an appropriate order/s,
direction/s including a writ in the nature of Mandamus
commanding and directing upon the respondent no. 7 to
Mutated Land Measuring an area of 10 decimals
appertaining to Thana No. 432, Hal Survey Plot No. 427
and Plot No. 1863 measuring an area 41 decimals and
thereafter open demand with respect to above mention
land situated in Mauza Atiya P.S. Bodh Gaya, District-
Gaya for the purpose of Revenue Collector.
Patna High Court CWJC No.6219 of 2022(3) dt.26-03-2026
2/3
(II). To direct the respondent no. 7 to mutate
land measuring an area of 6 decimals appertaining to
Thana No. 432 Hal Survey Khata No. 436, Hal Survey
Plot No. 432 thereafter open demand with respect to
above mentioned land situated in Mauza Atiya, P.S. Bodh
Gaya, District-Gaya for the purpose of Revenue
Collection.
(III). To direct the respondent no. 7 to mutate
and open demand with respect to above mention land in
view of the Judgment and decree dated 24.02.2001
passed in Suit No. 5506/98/310/98 passed by the
Settlement Officer, Gaya under Sections 106 of the Bihar
Tenancy Act.
(IV). To any other reliefs to which the
petitioner may be found entitled in the facts and
circumstances of the case.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Circle Officer, Bodh Gaya has not mutated the name of the
petitioner over the land in question over which the petitioner is
in possession by virtue of the judgment and decree passed in
Title Suit No. 5506 of 1998.
4. Learned AC to SC 25 draws the attention of this
Court that upon perusal of the entire writ petition, not a single
application has been brought on record to show that the
petitioner had ever approached the Circle Officer, Bodh Gaya
for mutation of his name over the land in question.
5. In view of the aforesaid submissions of the parties
Patna High Court CWJC No.6219 of 2022(3) dt.26-03-2026
3/3
and taking note to the fact that the matter relates to the mutation
of the land in the name of the petitioner, the petitioner is
directed to approach the Circle Officer, Bodh Gaya with a
proper application for mutation and on such application being
made it is expected that necessary actions/orders be taken/
passed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of
application along with a copy of this order.
6. Accordingly, the writ application stands disposed of
with the aforesaid liberty.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
khushbu/-
U
Checking your session…