Dismissed¶30

Ram Naresh Singh and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC7 Jul 2025CWJC/13091/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

non-joinder of necessary parties; impleader of affected persons; landless persons; parcha; ceiling Case No.213/73-74; surplus land declaration; Bihar Land Reforms (Fix of Ceiling Land) Act s.5(1)(iii); Gazette notification 16.1.2004; settlement orders 19.2.2004 and 24.2.2004; Abhilekh No.4; order dated 6.6.2017 no jurisdiction; Chief Conservator of Forests v. Collector (2003) 3 SCC 472; delay/laches objection; CWJC No.13091 of 2017; Siwan; Justice Rajiv Roy.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed on the ground of non-joinder of necessary parties. ¶30

Ram Naresh Singh and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition is liable to be dismissed for non-joinder of necessary parties, the landless persons named in the impugned settlement orders not having been impleaded as respondents +1 more

¶29

Court's answer

The writ petition is dismissed on the ground of non-joinder of necessary parties.

¶30

Ratio / Principle

The landless persons whose names find incorporation in the orders of the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Siwan and the Circle Officer, Siwan are necessary parties: any order passed in favour of the petitioner would have a direct bearing on them, and the petitioner deliberately chose not to implead them as party respondents.

¶27

Key takeaways

Pending interlocutory applications, if any, also stand disposed of.ratio¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court, CWJC No.13091 of 2017 (Rajiv Roy, J.; order dt. 07-07-2025): Writ petition dismissed solely on the ground of non-joinder of necessary parties. The petitioners had sought quashing of a Gazette notification dt. 16.1.2004 declaring their land (Khata No.910, Khesra Nos.1044-1045, village Sarasar, circle Siwan Sadar, ceiling Case No.213/73-74, purchased in 1961) as surplus and acquired without notice and without proceeding under section 5(1)(iii) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fix of Ceiling Land) Act, together with parts of the settlement orders dt. 19.2.2004 and 24.2.2004 of Abhilekh No.4 and an order dt. 6.6.2017 passed by respondent No.3 in Case No.2 of 2005-2006 (disposed for want of jurisdiction after 12 years). The impugned orders incorporated the names of landless persons in whose favour the parcha was to be issued; the petitioner deliberately did not implead them. Applying Chief Conservator of Forests v. Collector, (2003) 3 SCC 472 (necessary parties must be impleaded, failing which the petition cannot be entertained), the Court held them necessary parties and dismissed the petition; pending I.As disposed. A delay objection (2004 notification challenged in 2017) was urged by State counsel, but the recorded ground of dismissal is non-joinder.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13091 of 2017

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Ram Naresh Singh and Anr

¶4

Ram Suresh Singh @ Suresh Singh Both Son of late Nathuni Singh Resident of Village- Sarasar, P.S.- Siwan Muffasil, Distt. - Siwan.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

¶6

The State Of Bihar and Ors

¶7

The Collector, Siwan.

¶8

The Addl. Collector, Siwan.

¶9

The Circle Officer, Siwan.

¶10

... ... Respondent/s

¶11

====================================================== Appearance :

¶12

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arbind Kumar, Adv. Mr. Madhuri Lata, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Birendra Prasad Singh, Adv. ======================================================

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY

ORAL ORDER

3 07-07-2025

Heard the parties.

2. The present writ petition has been preferred:

¶18

for issuance of an appropriate Writ/Writs /direction/directions to the Respondents for quashing Gazette notification dated 16.1.2004 with regard to the land of Khata No-910 Khesara No-1044 and 1045 situated at village sarsar, circle Siwan Sadar, Dist -Siwan of ceiling Case No-213/73-74 which was purchased by the petitioners in the year 1961 has been declared as surplus Land and acquired without any Notice to the petitioners and without proceeding under section 5 (1) (iii) of Bihar Land Reforms (Fix of Ceiling Land) Act in ceiling proceeding and for further quashing that part of the order dated 19.2.2004 and 24.2.2004 of Abhilekh

¶19

Patna High Court CWJC No.13091 of 2017(3) dt.07-07-2025 2/3

¶20

No-4 by which the above said land was settled by the respondents authorities. And for further quashing order dated 6.6.2017 passed by respondent No-3 in case no-2 of 2005-2006 which was disposed of on the ground of no jurisdiction after keeping the case pending for 12 years.

¶21

At the outset, learned State Counsel submits that 2004

¶22

Gazette notification has been challenged in the year 2017 and as such, the same is fit to be dismissed. He further submits that the order dated 19.02.2004 passed by the Circle Officer, Siwan as also the order dated 24.02.2024 passed by the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Siwan incorporates the name of the landless people whom the land was to be settled. He submits that a perusal of the list of respondents show that none of them have been made party respondent and as such, it is fit to be dismissed for non-joinder of necessary parties.

¶23

From perusal of the record, this Court finds that on 28.04.2025, on the ground of illness of the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mrs. Madhuri Lata, an adjournment was made.

¶24

Today, on call, Mr. Arbind Kumar submits that he has received no objection on behalf of the petitioner which he is filing in the Court. The same is accepted.

¶25

This Court is in full conformity with the submissions put forward by the learned State Counsel. The order in question

¶26

Patna High Court CWJC No.13091 of 2017(3) dt.07-07-2025 3/3

¶27

incorporates the details of the landless persons in whose favour the parcha was to be issued. The same is part of the writ petition but deliberately, the petitioner chose not to implead them as party respondent.

¶28

In the case of Chief Conservator of Forests, Government of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Collector and Others [reported in (2003) 3 SCC 472] , the Hon’ble Supreme Court states that the necessary party in a dispute must be impleaded in the suit or proceeding and failure to do so, the petition cannot be entertained.

¶29

Here also, any order passed in favour of the petitioner will have direct bearing on the landless persons whose names find incorporated in the order of the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Siwan as also the Circle Officer, Siwan. However, they have not been made party respondent.

¶30

In that background, the writ petition is dismissed on the ground of non-joinder of necessary parties.

¶31

Pending I.A.(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

¶32

(Rajiv Roy, J)

¶33

Vijay Singh/-

¶34

Ram Naresh Singh and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Naresh Singh and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mithlesh Kumar @ Mithilesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ranjeet Yadav @ Ranjeet Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ritesh Kumar @ Nitesh Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Narayan Shaw Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Bharteshwar Prasad Sinha Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Bibi Majeda and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.