Patna High Court
Ajit Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court ordered that the respondents must dispose of the petitioner's representation within four weeks of the hearing and refrain from unlawful interference.
Summary
The petitioner, Ajit Kumar Singh, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the respondents, including various district and police officials, to dispose of his representation concerning construction on his land (Khata No. 279, Khesara No. 1910) and to restrain certain officials from unlawfully interfering with the construction. The petitioner argued that he would approach the revenue/administrative court with a fresh representation, and the State counsel raised no objection. The Court observed that if the petition is filed within four weeks of hearing, the respondent authorities must promptly conclude the matter. Accordingly, the Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the respondents to take the matter to its logical conclusion at the earliest. No specific statutes or precedents were cited.
Issues considered
- Whether the respondents can be directed by a writ of mandamus to dispose of the petitioner's representation regarding construction on his land
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to restrain the respondents from interfering with his construction activities
Subjects
- writ of mandamus
- land dispute
- construction
- administrative law
- representation
- restraining order
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8689 of 2025
======================================================
Ajit Kumar Singh S/o Late Suresh Prasad Singh, Resident of Village-
Khetalpura, P.S. - Sare, District- Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate, Nalanda, Biharsharif.
2. The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Biharsharif.
3. The Land Reform Deputy Collector, Biharsharif.
4. The Circle Officer, Asthawan, District- Nalanda.
5. The Superintendent of Police, Nalanda, Biharsharif.
6. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Biharsharif.
7. The S.H.O. Sare, Police Station, District- Nalanda.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Government Advocate (10)
: Mr. Parmendra Kumar Singh, AC to GA-10
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 04-05-2026 Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for
the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
grant of following relief(s):
“(i) for issuance of appropriate direction,
order, writ in the nature of mandamus
commanding the respondents to dispose of the
representation as contained in annexure-1 of this
writ application by restraining the respondent
no.-4 and respondent no.-7 from illegally and
unlawfully interfering and forcing the petitioner
to stop construction over his land bearing Khata
No.- 279, Khesara No. 1910, total area- 3
Patna High Court CWJC No.8689 of 2025(2) dt.04-05-2026
2/2
dismal, Thana No. 239, Mauza Khetalpura,
Circle Office-Asthawan, P.S.- Sare, District-
Nalanda until or unless he will give nazarana for
doing construction over it.
(ii) for any other relief/reliefs for
which the petitioner is entitled to, in the fact and
the circumstances of this case.”
3. After some argument, learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that he shall be approaching the
Revenue/Administrative side/court by filing a fresh
representation.
4. Learned State counsel has no objection.
5. In that background, the writ petition is disposed of
with the aforesaid observation that if such petition is preferred
in four weeks after noticing/hearing the parties, the respondent
authorities are duty bound to take the matter to its logical
conclusion, at an earliest.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U
Checking your session…