Patna High Court
Binod YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RANA VIKRAM SINGH
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed; the petitioner must first file an appeal before the Collector as mandated by Section 9 of the Bihar Land Mutation Act, 2011.
Summary
The petitioner, Binod Yadav, challenged an order dated 22‑04‑2026 by the Additional District Magistrate‑cum‑Additional Collector, Jamui, which cancelled the Jamabandi No. 16/76 in his father’s name for land in Mauza‑Mangrar. He alleged that he was not given a proper hearing and that the documents filed by him were ignored. The State argued that the order is appealable under Section 9 of the Bihar Land Mutation Act, 2011 and that the petitioner must first avail the statutory remedy before approaching the High Court. The Court held that the writ petition is not maintainable at this stage and directed the petitioner to file an appeal before the Collector within three weeks, with a liberty to make an interim application to prevent dispossession. Accordingly, the writ application was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition challenging a cancellation of Jamabandi is maintainable when a statutory appeal under Section 9 of the Bihar Land Mutation Act, 2011 is available.
- Whether the petitioner was denied a hearing in violation of the procedural requirements under the Act.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Land Mutation Act, 2011 — s. Section 9
Subjects
- land mutation
- Jamabandi cancellation
- statutory appeal
- Section 9
- Bihar Land Mutation Act
- writ jurisdiction
- hearing rights
- dispossession
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8652 of 2026
======================================================
Binod Yadav, Son of Late Naurangi Yadav, Resident of village- Mangrar,
P.O.- Diggi, Block- Laxmipur, P.S.- Mohanpur. District- Jamui.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Revenue and
Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate, Jamui.
3. The Additional District Magistrate, Jamui.
4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Jamui.
5. The Deputy Collector of Land Reforms, Jamui, District- Jamui.
6. The Circle Officer, Laxmipur Anchal, District-Jamui.
7. Hukumdev Narayan Yadav, Son of Yugal Kishor Yadav, Resident of village-
Mangrar, P.O.- Diggi, Block- Laxmipur, P.S.- Mohanpur, District- Jamui.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Onkar Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, GA-2
Mr. Venkatesh Kirti, JC to GA-2
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RANA VIKRAM SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 29-06-2026
Heard Mr. Onkar Kumar, the learned Advocate
for the petitioner and Mr. Vinay Kirti Singh, the learned GA-2
for the State, assisted by Mr. Venkatesh Kirti, learned JC to
GA-2.
Patna High Court CWJC No.8652 of 2026 dt.29-06-2026
2/5
2. The petitioner has directly approached this
Court against an order dated 22.04.2026 passed by the
Additional District Magistrate-cum-Additional Collector,
Jamui (respondent No. 3) in Jamabandi Cancellation Case No.
311/2024-25, whereby the respondent No. 3 has cancelled the
Jamabandi No. 16/76 created in the name of the father of the
petitioner pertaining to the land situated in Mauza-Mangrar,
Khata No. 21, Plot No. 01, Tauzi No. 445 and Thana No. 209
having an area of 8.61 acres.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner
highlights the conduct of respondent No. 3, i.e., the Additional
District Magistrate, Jamui, who did not give proper hearing to
the petitioner in spite of having issued notice to him. It has
also been submitted that the case and the documents produced
on behalf of the petitioner were not considered, at all, while
passing the order impugned.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
State submits that though there is a provision for statutory
appeal against the order passed by the respondent No. 3, i.e.,
the Additional District Magistrate-cum-Additional Collector,
Jamui, but the petitioner has not availed that statutory remedy
and has directly approached this Court. Hence, it has been
Patna High Court CWJC No.8652 of 2026 dt.29-06-2026
3/5
submitted that the present writ application is not maintainable
at this stage.
5. The respondent No. 3, i.e., the Additional
District Magistrate, Jamui has passed the order impugned,
which is appealable one. Clause (6) (a) of Section 9 of the
Bihar Land Mutation Act, 2011 (in short the Act of 2011)
stipulates that an appeal against the order of the Additional
Collector shall lie with the Collector of the district within
thirty (30) days of the order appealed against; Clause (6) (b)
of Section 9 of the Act of 2011 provides that the Collector of
the district may condone the delay in filing appeals provided
he is satisfied that there are sufficient reasons for the delay
and Clause (6) (c) of Section 9 of the Act of 2011 lays down
that the Collector of the district shall not pass any order
modifying, altering or setting aside the order appealed against
unless the concerned parties have been given a reasonable
opportunity of being heard.
6. The petitioner has recourse to a very
categorical and definite provision for appeal against the order
passed by the Additional Collector, cancelling the long
standing Jamabandi of the petitioner, which has been running,
as claimed, since 1976 in the name of the petitioner’s father.
Patna High Court CWJC No.8652 of 2026 dt.29-06-2026
4/5
7. The petitioner, under the aforesaid
circumstance, is at liberty to file an appeal before the
Collector, Jamui in terms of Clause (6) (a) of Section 9 of the
Act of 2011 within a period of three weeks henceforth and on
such an appeal being filed before the Collector, Jamui, he is
duty bound to hear the appeal within the stipulated period
after giving opportunity of hearing to all the concerned, which
is the mandate of the law.
8. The Collector, Jamui shall pass a speaking
order positively deciding all the issues raised before him and
if on appreciation of the evidence produced before him and
the documents examined, an enquiry report, if any required by
him, convinces him that the order passed by the Additional
Collector is not in accordance with law, the Collector, Jamui
will take all necessary steps to rectify such mistakes, if any, as
has been committed by the Additional Collector within a
period of six weeks thereafter.
9. At this stage, the learned Advocate for the
petitioner highlights that in terms of the order impugned
passed by the Additional Collector, Jamui, the petitioners are
being threatened to be dispossessed. Since this Court is
disposing off the present writ application with a liberty to the
Patna High Court CWJC No.8652 of 2026 dt.29-06-2026
5/5
petitioner to file an appeal before the Collector within a period
of three weeks from today, the petitioner is also accorded a
liberty to file an interim application before the Collector,
Jamui, pointing out the alleged dispossession and if such an
application is filed by the petitioner, the Collector, Jamui will
consider the same within three days from the date of such
filing and will take necessary action after having heard the
parties concerned.
10. The writ application stands disposed off
accordingly.
11. Interlocutory application(s), if any, also
stands disposed off.
(Rana Vikram Singh, J)
Praveen-II/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 30.06.2026
Transmission Date N/A
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.