Patna High Court
Nawal Kishore SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RANA VIKRAM SINGH
Holding
The Court directed the District Magistrate‑Cum‑Collector to decide the pending appeal on merits within three months and disposed of the writ petition.
Summary
The petitioner purchased a 13-decimal plot of land in 2003 and obtained a mutation in his name. A rival claimant later asserted ownership, leading the petitioner to seek cancellation of the jamabandi under Section 9 of the Bihar Land Mutation Act, 2011. The Additional Collector rejected the petitioner's application and ordered cancellation of the petitioner's jamabandi. The petitioner appealed to the District Magistrate‑Cum‑Collector in 2022, but the appeal remained undecided for three years. The writ petition sought a direction for the District Magistrate‑Cum‑Collector to decide the pending appeal expeditiously. The High Court held that the writ petition was maintainable to address the undue delay and directed the District Magistrate‑Cum‑Collector to dispose of the appeal on merits within three months, thereby disposing the writ petition.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition is maintainable to compel the District Magistrate‑Cum‑Collector to decide a pending appeal under Section 9 of the Bihar Land Mutation Act, 2011.
- Whether the delay of three years in deciding the appeal warrants judicial intervention.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Land Mutation Act, 2011 — s. 9, 9(6)(a)
Subjects
- land mutation
- jamabandi cancellation
- writ jurisdiction
- administrative delay
- Section 9
- Bihar Land Mutation Act
- appeal disposal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8052 of 2026
======================================================
Nawal Kishore Singh Son of Late Ram Balak Singh, Resident of Village-
Tetua, P.S.- Atri, District- Gaya Ji.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through its Additional Chief Secretary, Department of
Land Reform and Revenue, Bihar, Patna.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Land Reform and Revenue,
Bihar, Patna.
3. The District Magistrate, Gaya Ji.
4. The Additional Collector, Gaya Ji.
5. Deputy Collector Land Reform, Neemchak Bathani, Gaya Ji.
6. Circle Officer, Atri, Gaya Ji.
7. Ashwini Kumar Singh, Son Late Vinod Singh, Resident of Village-
Sahiyadpur, P.S. Atri, District- Gaya Ji.
8. Mahesh Manjhi, Son of Late Jamuna Manjhi, Resident of Village- Tetua
Tandpar, P.S.- Atri, District- Gaya Ji.
9. Gauri Shankar Singh, Sons of Late Hardip Singh, Resident of Village-
Punarh, P.S.- Atri, District- Gaya Ji.
10. Baiju Singh, Sons of Late Hardip Singh, Resident of Village-Punarh, P.S.-
Atri, District- Gaya Ji.
11. Siyaram Singh, Sons of Late Hardip Singh, Resident of Village-Punarh, P.S.-
Atri, District- Gaya Ji.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Chandni Kumari, Adv.
Ms. Sakshi Kumari, Adv.
For the State : Ms. Archana Meenakshee, GP-6
Mr. Rana Veer Prawar, AC to GP-6
Mr. Harish Singh, AC to GP-6
Patna High Court CWJC No.8052 of 2026 dt.01-07-2026
2/6
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RANA VIKRAM SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 01-07-2026
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. By preferring the present writ application, the
petitioner has prayed for issuance of a direction to the District
Magistrate-Cum-Collector, Gaya Ji (respondent No. 3) to
expeditiously decide Appeal No. 09 of 2022, pending before
him since 2022 against the order dated 09.02.2022 passed by
the Additional Collector, Gaya Ji, in Jamabandi Cancellation
Nos. 23/19-20/36/20-21.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that the petitioner has purchased a piece of land in the year
2003 situated in Mauza-Tetua, Khata No. 179, Plot No. 1163,
P.S.-Atri, District-Gaya Ji having an area of 13 decimal from
Jamuna Manjhi through a registered sale-deed dated
11.09.2003. Thereafter, he filed an application for getting the
same mutated in his name vide Mutation Case No. 208 of 2006
before the Circle Officer, Atri, Gaya Ji and accordingly, after
due verification and completing all the necessary formalities,
Jamabandi was created in his name and rent receipt was issued
and since then, he has been paying rent on regular basis.
Patna High Court CWJC No.8052 of 2026 dt.01-07-2026
3/6
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner further
points out that another person, namely, Hardeep Singh said to
have purchased the land from Bakhari Ram, who claimed
himself to be the purchaser of the said land from Vishun
Manjhi, Son of Jagmohan Manjhi in connection with the same
piece of land which the petitioner claimed to have purchased
from Jamuna Manjhi, Son of Vishun Manjhi.
5. Having come to know about the aforesaid
purchase and Jamabandi accordingly being run in their name,
the petitioner approached the Additional Collector, Gaya Ji
under Section 9 of the Bihar Land Mutation Act, 2011 (in short
the Act of 2011) for cancellation of the aforesaid Jamabandi.
6. The Additional Collector, Gaya Ji, after having
heard all the parties connected to the aforesaid proceeding of
Jamabandi cancellation case, rejected the application of the
petitioner vide order dated 09.02.2022 and furthermore, he also
issued a direction to cancel the Jamabandi of the petitioner in
connection with the aforesaid land, the matter of which was not
pending before him.
7. Against the aforesaid order dated 09.02.2022,
passed in Jamabandi Cancellation Nos. 23/19-20/36/20-21, the
petitioner preferred an appeal in terms of Section 9(6)(a) of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.8052 of 2026 dt.01-07-2026
4/6
Act before the District Magistrate-Cum-Collector, Gaya Ji
within time in the year 2022 itself, but the same has not been
decided till date by the District Magistrate-Cum-Collector,
Gaya Ji (respondent No. 3).
8. The mandate of law, as stipulated in Section 9
of the Act of 2011, empowering the Collector to decide the
appeal passed against the order passed by the Additional
Collector in matter relating to cancellation of Jamabandi
mandates him to hear the matter expeditiously in order to settle
the land dispute between the parties which is the main cause of
generation of litigation at various levels. In the case, at hand,
the appeal has been preferred by the petitioner well within
time, i.e., almost three years ago, but till date, that appeal has
not even been decided by the District Magistrate-Cum-
Collector, Gaya Ji.
9. Ms. Archana Meenakshee, the learned GP-6, at
the very outset, objects to the contentions made on behalf of
the petitioner by stating that the present writ application is not
maintainable in view of the statutory provision of preferring an
appeal as provided under Section 9 of the Act of 2011. It has
further been submitted that since the petitioner has already
preferred an appeal before the District Magistrate-Cum-
Patna High Court CWJC No.8052 of 2026 dt.01-07-2026
5/6
Collector, Gaya Ji vide Appeal No. 09 of 2022, he has no locus
to file the present case during the pendency of the said appeal.
10. After having heard the parties and having
perused the relevant documents appended with the writ
application, it is evident that the issue is not with respect to
filing an appeal before the District Magistrate-Cum-Collector
and during the pendency of which the petitioner could not
approach this Court under writ jurisdiction, but is rather a
totally different one, but rather his main grievance is that of
non-disposal of the said appeal in spite of the lapse of three
years of its filing.
11. The petitioner has come to this Court solely
with a prayer that he had already preferred an appeal before the
District Magistrate-Cum-Collector, Gaya Ji (respondent No. 3)
against the order passed by the Additional Collector, Gaya Ji
way-back in the year 2022. Thus, the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that he would be
satisfied if the District Magistrate-Cum-Collector, Gaya Ji
(respondent No. 3) consider the appeal preferred by him in
right earnest and dispose of the same on merits without any
further delay.
12. In this backdrop, the District Magistrate-
Patna High Court CWJC No.8052 of 2026 dt.01-07-2026
6/6
Cum-Collector, Gaya Ji (respondent No. 3) is, hereby, directed
to decide the appeal on merits after having examined all the
facts brought before him by the concerned parties and having
given proper opportunity of hearing to all of them. It is
expected from the District Magistrate-Cum-Collector, Gaya Ji
that he will pass a positive and determinative order,
adjudicating the claim of the petitioner as also the rival claim
of the respondents within a period of three months from the
date of receipt/production of a copy of this order strictly
adhering to time limit so mandated hereinabove.
13. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the
writ petition stands disposed off.
14. Interlocutory application(s), if any, also
stands disposed off accordingly.
15. Let a copy of this order be transmitted to the
District Magistrate-Cum-Collector, Gaya Ji (respondent No. 3)
forthwith for necessary compliance thereof.
(Rana Vikram Singh, J)
Praveen-II/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 02.07.2026
Transmission Date N/A
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.