Allowed¶35

Md. Shakib v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC9 Jul 2025CWJC/15413/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Deficit registration fee Rs.2,10,600/- set aside; Khesra Classification; agricultural land versus residential category; Assistant Inspector General Registration Munger; Sub-Registrar Balia; Begusarai; remand and fresh consideration after CWJC No.14014 of 2013; registration of land directed as per law; writ application allowed.

What did the court decide?

Writ application allowed; the impugned demand of Rs.2,10,600/- contained in letter dated 05.07.2016 set aside; respondent no.5 directed to register the land in question as per law. ¶35

Md. Shakib Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15413 of 2016

¶2

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

¶3

Md. Shakib S/o Md. Shoeb R/o Village - Choti Balia, P.S. - Balia, P.O. Lakhminia, District - Begusarai.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Bihar through I.G. Registration, Bihar, Patna.

¶7

Assistant I.G. Registration, Munger.

¶8

The Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Begusarai.

¶9

The District Sub-Registrar, Begusarai.

¶10

The Sub-Registrar, Balia, District -Begusarai.

¶11

... ... Respondent/s

¶12

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

¶13

Appearance :

¶14

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Dhirendra Kumar, AC to AAG-6 ======================================================

¶15

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA

ORAL ORDER

4 09-07-2025

Heard the parties.

The petitioner has prayed for grant of following

¶20

relief in the present writ application:

¶21

“ (i) For quashing the order dated

¶22

03.06.2016 passed by Assistant Inspector General, Registration, Munger.

¶23

(ii) As a consequence quashing of the communication dated 05.07.2016 contained in Memo No.158 passed by respondent no.5.

¶24

(iii) And/or other order/orders which the petitioner is entitled to. ”

¶25

Patna High Court CWJC No.15413 of 2016(4) dt.09-07-2025 2/4

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier also the petitioner had approached this Court vide CWJC No.14014 of 2013 for seeking the same relief, which was heard and disposed of on 13.10.2015 (Annexure-9), by which the earlier order of the Assistant Inspector General, Registration demanding deficit fee of Rs.2,10,600/- was set aside and the matter was remitted back to the Assistant Inspector General, Registration for fresh consideration. By the said order of this Court the petitioner was granted the liberty to take all possible pleas available under the law before the Assistant Inspector General, Registration.

¶27

After remittance of the matter before the Assistant Inspector General, Registration, the petitioner appeared before him and placed his reliance on “Khesra Classification” notified in Government records, which shows the land in question to be classified as an ‘agricultural land’. However, without dealing with this aspect of the matter the Assistant Inspector General has passed the impugned order treating the land in question to be of ‘residential category’ and thereafter reiterated the earlier imposition of deficit fee of Rs.2,10,600/-.

¶28

Per contra the learned counsel appearing for respondents-State submits that the order passed by the Assistant

¶29

Patna High Court CWJC No.15413 of 2016(4) dt.09-07-2025 3/4

¶30

Inspector General is proper and in accordance with law and hence the present writ application should be dismissed.

¶31

The ‘Khesra Classification’ which has been brought on record by way of Annexure-3 to the writ application was also produced before the Assistant Inspector General by the petitioner in support of his contention that the land belongs to agricultural category, but no reasons have been assigned in the impugned order as to why the land in question has been treated as residential purpose, except placing reliance on the report submitted by Sub-Registrar, Balia, which is at Annexure-B of the counter affidavit filed by the respondents-State.

¶32

This Court is of the view that so long as the classification of the land in question is shown to be of agricultural category in the Khesra Classification, which is not disputed by learned counsel appearing for respondents-State, the Assistant Inspector General should not have classified the land in question to be of residential category. Hence the demand for deficit of Rs.2,10,600/- is not proper and not in accordance with the ‘Khesra Classification’.

¶33

In this view of the matter the impugned demand contained in letter dated 05.07.2016 of Rs.2,10,600/- passed by respondent no.4 is set aside and the writ application is

¶34

Patna High Court CWJC No.15413 of 2016(4) dt.09-07-2025 4/4

¶35

accordingly allowed. Consequently the respondent no.5 is directed to register the land in question as per law.

¶36

(Alok Kumar Sinha, J)

¶37

Prakash Narayan U

Md. Shakib v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Shakib v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Umakant Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Kumkum Ranjan Vs The State of Bihar

Arun Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Phul Jha Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Mukesh Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Chandra Sharma Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.