Patna High Court
Rambabu SinghversusThe State Of Bihar and Ors
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court disposed of the writ petition without adjudicating the merits, granting the petitioner liberty to approach the revenue authority.
Summary
The petitioner, Rambabu Singh, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to set aside several orders dated in early 2003 issued by the Circle Officer, Bathanaha, which recorded (bandobasti) a 0.08 decimal portion of land (Khata No. 1575, Plot No. 99) in favor of private respondents Upendra Rai and Kailash Rai, claiming the land belongs to the Bihar Government. The petitioner alleged that the private respondents were not landless and that the bandobasti was illegal. The court, after hearing counsel for both sides, did not address the substantive merits of the land dispute. Instead, it granted the petitioner liberty to approach the appropriate revenue authority to raise his points. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of without any substantive order on the merits.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate remedy for challenging the Circle Officer's bandobasti orders?
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus to set aside the revenue orders?
- Whether the court should intervene in the substantive land ownership dispute at this stage?
Subjects
- land reform
- bandobasti
- mandamus
- revenue law
- property rights
- writ jurisdiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9366 of 2018
======================================================
Rambabu Singh Son of Ramautar Singh, Resident of Village- Godhiya, Ward
No. 1, P.S.- Bathanaha, District- Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. The Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Sitamarhi.
3. The Additional Collector, Sitamarhi.
4. The D.C.L.R., Land Reform, Sitamarhi Sadar.
5. The Block Development officer, Bathanaha.
6. The Circle Officer, Bathnaha.
7. The Halka Karmchari, Gram Panchayat Raj Harpur Bhalha, Bathnaha.
8. Mukhiya, Panchayat Raj Harpur, Bhalha Bathnaha.
9. Upendra Rai, Son of Chandeshwar Rai, residence of Village Harpur Bhalaha
Tola Godhiya, Distt.- Sitamarhi.
10. Kailash Rai, son of Chandeshwar Rai, residence of Village Harpur Bhalaha
Tola Godhiya, Distt.- Sitamarhi.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Devendra Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, GP-14
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 16-02-2026 Heard Mr. Devendra Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, learned GP-14
representing the State.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
grant of following relief(s):
“for issuance of writ in nature of
mandamus and directing and commanding the
respondent authorities for setting aside order
dated 21.01.2003 and 13.02.2003, 13.03.2003
and 25.03.2003 respectively passed by
Patna High Court CWJC No.9366 of 2018(3) dt.16-02-2026
2/2
consequential order by Circle Officer,
Bathanaha in Bandobasti Case No. 4/2003-04
whereby and where under mentioned in
appertaining Khata No. 1575 Plot No. 99 are
0.08 dec. which is Bihar Sarkar. Justi beside
north the side. The petitioner lived at their
residential house. The private respondents have
also make house thereon infront of Bihar Sarkar
land appertaining Khata No. 1575 Plot No. 99
and illegally Bandobasti in favour of Upen
Upendra Rai son of Chandeshwar Rai and
Kailash Rai son of Chandeshwar Rai.”
3. After some arguments, learned counsel for the
petitioner shall be taking all the points before appropriate
revenue authority to show that the respondents are also not
landless person.
4. Granting said liberty and without commenting on
the merit of the case, the writ petition is disposed of.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U
Checking your session…