The petitioner challenged the rejection of his representation and the selection of land within the Mata Durga Temple boundary for constructing a Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan. The Court found the administrative decision was due, reasoned, and not arbitrary, dismissing the writ petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12813 of 2025
======================================================
Ajay Kumar Mishra S/O Raj Kumar Mishra, R/o- Village- Bhinagar, Ward No. 03, P.O.- Biraul, P.S.- Pandaul, District- Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Alok Ranjan, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Advocate (09)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 18-08-2025
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the State.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12813 of 2025 dt.18-08-2025 2/3
petitioner has been rejected. The petitioner has further sought quashing of part of memo no. 169 dated 13.01.2025 issued by the District Magistrate, Madhubani, regarding construction of Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan over land situated in Mauza–Biraul, Khata Nos. 41 and 1, Khesra Nos. 1563 and 1565. Directions for construction of the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan at an alternative site have also been prayed for.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12813 of 2025 dt.18-08-2025 3/3
perusal of the records, this Court finds that the order dated 02.05.2025 reflects due consideration of the representation filed on behalf of the petitioner. The authorities have assigned reasons for rejection of the claim of the petitioner, and this Court does not find any apparent illegality, arbitrariness, or perversity in the decision-making process warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Ashwini/-
| AFR/NAFR | |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | NA |
| Uploading Date | 19/08/2025 |
| Transmission Date | NA |
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the selection of land for construction of Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan was arbitrary or illegal?
Whether the decision to reject the petitioner's representation suffered from perversity or illegality?
Whether the court should interfere with the administrative decision regarding land acquisition for public building?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ajay Kumar Mishra
The State of Bihar
The Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar
The Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department
The Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department
The Divisional Commissioner, Darbhanga Division
Dr. Anshuman, J.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
