Patna High Court
Manoj SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RANA VIKRAM SINGH
Holding
The writ petition is disposed, allowing the petitioner to seek relief in the civil court where the title suit is pending.
Summary
Manoj Singh filed a writ petition challenging the issuance of a Basgit Parcha by the Circle Officer, Taraiya, which granted land rights to several private respondents. The petitioner feared dispossession of his land following a measurement conducted by the respondents on 13‑04‑2026. The same relief was also being sought in Title Suit No. 997 of 2023 pending before the Sub‑Judge, Saran. The Court observed that the same relief cannot be pursued simultaneously in a civil suit and a writ petition, and that the petitioner had approached the wrong forum for interim relief. Consequently, the petitioner was permitted to withdraw the writ application and approach the civil court for a restraining order, and the writ petition was disposed.
Issues considered
- The appropriateness of maintaining a writ petition when the same relief is pending in a civil suit.
- Whether simultaneous proceedings in writ jurisdiction and civil jurisdiction for the same relief are permissible.
- The permissibility of withdrawing a writ petition to seek relief in the appropriate civil forum.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Basgit Parcha
- writ jurisdiction
- civil suit
- parallel proceedings
- withdrawal of writ
- land dispossession
- interim restraining order
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8971 of 2026
======================================================
Manoj Singh, Son of Late Bali Singh, Resident of Village- Dumari, Chapra,
P.S.- Taraiya, District- Saran at Chapra.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra.
3. The Circle Officer, Taraiya, District- Saran at Chapra.
4. Gyanti Devi, Wife of Dharmdas, Resident of Village- Parsauni, P.S.-
Gopalganj, District- Gopalganj, at present Village- Dumari (Andhrawari),
P.S.- Taraiya, District- Saran.
5. Dharmdas, Son of Late Punit Das, Resident of Village- Parsauni, P.S.-
Gopalganj, District- Gopalganj, at present Village- Dumari (Andhrawari),
P.S.- Taraiya, District- Saran.
6. Anita Devi, Son of Dahari Das, Resident of Village- Parsauni, P.S.-
Gopalganj, District- Gopalganj, at present Village- Dumari (Andhrawari),
P.S.- Taraiya, District- Saran.
7. Dahari Das, Son of Dahrmdas, Resident of Village- Parsauni, P.S.-
Gopalganj, District- Gopalganj, at present Village- Dumari (Andhrawari),
P.S.- Taraiya, District- Saran.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Standing Counsel (13)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RANA VIKRAM SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 29-06-2026 Heard the parties.
2. After vehemently argued for sometime, the learned
counsel for the petitioner prays for withdrawal of the writ
application in view of the pendency of the Title Suit No. 997 of
2023 which is pending before the learned Sub-Judge (Sr.
Division), Saran at Chapra for the same relief(s) assailing the
issuance of Basgit Parcha in favour of the private respondent. In
Patna High Court CWJC No.8971 of 2026(2) dt.29-06-2026
2/3
the mean time, the petitioner has also approached this Court
against the same order passed by Circle Officer, Taraiya, Saran
issuing Basgit Parcha in favour of the private respondents
herein. The Civil Court of competent jurisdiction and the
Constitutional Court under writ jurisdiction cannot be
approached simultaneously for the same set of relief(s) against
the same order passed by the Circle Officer, Taraiya, Saran.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner apprehends
dispossession from the piece of land in view of the measurement
done by the respondents on 13.04.2026. Petitioner is at liberty
under the specific provisions of the C.P.C. to file an application
before the competent Court where the matter is pending for
restraining the respondents from dispossessing him from the suit
land.
4. Learned counsel for the State also submits that the
petitioner has approached the wrong forum and rather he has
been availing two forums at the same, which is simply
impermissible in the eyes of law.
5. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner
seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this application with
liberty to approach the competent Court of civil jurisdiction
where the title suit is going on in connection with the land in
Patna High Court CWJC No.8971 of 2026(2) dt.29-06-2026
3/3
question for filing an appropriate application for restraining the
respondents from imminent dispossession from the disputed
land.
6. It goes without saying that if such an application is
preferred by the petitioner before the competent Court of civil
jurisdiction, the Court concerned must consider the same on
priority basis and decide the issue after having heard all the
concerned parties in the matter as soon as possible in order to
avoid future complication.
7. In these terms, this writ application is disposed off.
(Rana Vikram Singh, J)
Saurabh.kr/
Supratim-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.