Patna High Court

Rameshwar Prasad RaiversusThe State of Bihar through the Secretary, Revenue and Land reforms , Govt. of Bihar, Patna

Decided: 9 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: RAJIV ROY

Holding

The court restored the dismissed civil writ case subject to payment of Rs. 500 to the Legal Services Committee.

Summary

The petitioner, Rameshwar Prasad Rai, filed an application seeking restoration of Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16157 of 2017, which had been dismissed for default on 5 May 2025. The dismissal was based on the petitioner’s failure to prosecute the original writ proceedings. The petitioner argued, in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the petition, that the default was inadvertent and that restoration would serve the ends of justice, provided a nominal fee was paid. Justice Rajiv Roy examined the reasons offered and held that the court has discretion to restore a dismissed case upon satisfaction of the petitioner’s request and payment of a prescribed fee. Accordingly, the court ordered the petitioner to pay Rs. 500 to the Patna High Court Legal Services Committee. Upon receipt of the fee, the court restored the original writ case to its file.

Issues considered

Whether a civil writ jurisdiction case dismissed for default can be restored upon payment of a nominal fee
Whether the petitioner’s reasons for default satisfy the court’s discretion to revive the proceeding

Subjects

restoration of suit
default dismissal
civil writ jurisdiction
legal services fee
high court procedure

Judgment

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                   Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2354 of 2025
                                                            In
                                    Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16157 of 2017
                     ======================================================
                     Rameshwar Prasad Rai Son of Late Bishwanath Rai, Resident of village-
                     Titara, P.S.- Mairwa, District- Siwan.
                                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                         Versus
                1.    The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Revenue and Land reforms , Govt.
                      of Bihar, Patna x
                2.   The Land Reforms Commissioner, Patna.
                3.   The District Magistrate, Siwan.
                4.   The Additional Collector, Siwan.
                5.   The Anchal Adhikari, Mairwa, District- Siwan.
                                                            ... ... Opposite Party/s
                     ======================================================
                     Appearance :
                     For the Petitioner/s     :     Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Adv.
                     For the Opposite Party/s :     Mr. Government Pleader 18
                     ======================================================
                     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
                                           ORAL ORDER
4    09-01-2026                       Heard the parties.

                                     2. The present application has been preferred for

                       restoration of CWJC No. 16157 of 2017 which has been dismissed

                       for default for non-prosecution of the present case on 05.05.2025 by

                       this Court.

                                     3. For the reasons assigned in Paragraph nos. 5 and 6 of

                       the petition, the MJC No. 2354 of 2025 is allowed subject to payment

                       of Rs. 500/- to Patna High Court Legal Services Committee.

                                     4. Accordingly, the CWJC No. 16157 of 2017 is restored

                       to its original file.



                                                    (Rajiv Roy, J)
Vijay Singh/-

U

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

Sanjay Kumar