Patna High Court
Shatrudhan Ram @ Shatrudhan Prasad,versusThe State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary,
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The Court directed the Circle Officer to mutate the land in favour of the petitioner, holding that the decree and compromise confer a right to mutation and the earlier Parwana is void.
Summary
The petitioner, Shatrudhan Ram, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Circle Officer of Bodhgaya to mutate 64.24 decimals of land in his favour, declaring a previously issued Parwana void. The petitioner’s title to the land was established by a decree in Title Suit No.105 of 2003, which the State appealed but the appeal was dismissed in 2008. The Circle Officer refused mutation, citing a settlement with a landless person and a Parwana issued to respondent No.5. The petitioner contended that the decree and a subsequent compromise with respondent No.5 gave him a vested right to the land. The High Court held that the Circle Officer’s refusal was contrary to law and ordered immediate mutation of the land in the petitioner’s name, thereby disposing of the writ petition with directions.
Issues considered
- Whether the Circle Officer’s refusal to mutate the land despite the decree in Title Suit No.105/2003 and a compromise is legally valid.
- Whether the Parwana issued in favour of respondent No.5 is void and can be set aside.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a mutation of the land under the revenue law.
Subjects
- land mutation
- mandamus
- title suit
- revenue law
- compromise
- parwana
- civil writ jurisdiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8216 of 2021
======================================================
Shatrudhan Ram @ Shatrudhan Prasad, S/o Late Ashrafi Ram, R/o Village
Nawan, Tola Gosaichak, P.S. Bodhgaya, Distt. Gaya, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Deptt. of Revenue and
Land Reforms, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate, Gaya.
3. The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Gaya.
4. The Circle Officer, Bodhgaya, Gaya.
5. Suraj Manjhi, S/o Late Kasam Manjhi, R/o Village Nawan, Tola Gosaichak,
P.S. Bodhgaya, Distt. Gaya, Bihar.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Brijeshwar Narayan Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Md. Khurshid Alam, Aag 12
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
5 05-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
2. The petitioner in paragraph no. 1 of the present writ
petition has sought, inter alia, following relief(s), which is
reproduced hereinafter:-
“ That this is an application for issue of an
appropriate writ, order/Direction in the nature of
Mandamus declaring the Parwana (copy not found) as null
and void and issue direction to Resp. No.4 (Circle Officer,
Bodhgaya, Gaya) to open demand of land admeasuring
64.24 decimals having Plot No.804 (old), 1011 (new) and
Khata No. 211 (old), 357 (new) situated in village – Nawan
Gosaichak under Bodhgaya revenue circle of Gaya district
Patna High Court CWJC No.8216 of 2021(5) dt.05-02-2026
2/4
in the name of petitioner following the right, title and
interest having been declared by the competent court / court
of learned Munsif, 2nd, Gaya in favour of petitioner in Title
Suit No. 105/2003 on 22.03.2005 and his brother and
subsequent partition of the said land among brothers and
after rejection of Title Appeal No. 34/2005 by the court of
learned District Judge, Gaya on 29.07.2008 preferred by
the State of Bihar and no further appeal having been
preferred in above cases the matter having attained
finality.”
3. Record reveals that Title Suit No. 105 of 2003 was
filed by one Rup Narayan Ram, Son of Late Asharfi Ram which
was decreed vide judgment and decree dated 22.03.2005 in
favour of the plaintiff-petitioners. The State was defendant in
the said suit. Losing the Title Suit, the State preferred Title
Appeal No. 34 of 2005 which was also dismissed for non-
prosecution vide order dated 29.07.2008. The petitioner on the
basis of the judgment and decree dated 22.03.2005, filed
Mutation case before the Circle Officer, Bodhgaya.
4. A reference has been given in Para-4 of the writ
petition that the Circle Officer, Bodh Gaya rejected the
application for mutation on the ground that 54 decimal of land
being the subject matter of the Title Suit was settled with the
landless person for which Parwana has already been issued in
favour of the respondent no.5. The petitioner has preferred
Misc. Case No. 15/2009-10/13/2010-11 before the L.R.D.C.,
Sadar, Gaya contending that since the land got recorded in the
name of the Government of Bihar, respondent no.5 could not be
Patna High Court CWJC No.8216 of 2021(5) dt.05-02-2026
3/4
impleaded as defendant in the said suit.
5. A reference has been given Para-6 of the writ
petition that during the pendency of the appeal before the
Additional Collector, respondent no.5 had entered into
compromise with the petitioner.
6. On the basis of the judgment and decree passed in
Title Suit No. 105/2003 declaring the title in favour of the
petitioner, as well as, compromise entered into between the
petitioner and the respondent no.5 and Parwana has been issued
in favour of the petitioner, the Circle Officer is required to give
effect to the order passed by the competent civil court declaring
the title of the petitioner. The Circle Officer could not have
refused to mutate the land. The action of the Circle Officer, in
such circumstances, cannot be said to be in accordance with law.
7. The subsequent act of the respondent no.5 also goes
to show that once compromise has been entered into between
the parties, the petitioner becomes entitled for the land for
which decree has been passed in his favour. The land is required
to be mutated in favour of the petitioner in accordance with law.
8. Accordingly, the Circle Officer concerned is
directed to forthwith mutate the land in favour of the petitioner
in accordance with law.
Patna High Court CWJC No.8216 of 2021(5) dt.05-02-2026
4/4
9. With the above observation and direction, the writ
petition stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
mantreshwar/-
U T
Checking your session…