Disposed¶35

Arun Pandey v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC14 Oct 2025CWJC/15596/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court CWJC 15596/2025, disposed 14-10-2025, Shailendra Singh, J. Land dispute: Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan construction over petitioner's plot (Khata 48, Plot 258, Mauza-Basauti, Saran); writ refused where parallel Title Suit 291/2025 pending before Sub Judge-I, Chapra; injunction petition arguments heard twice; Article 226; parallel civil proceedings; no precedent engaged.

What did the court decide?

No substantive mandamus granted; writ petition disposed of with the expectation that the Court of Sub Judge-I, Chapra decides the petitioner's injunction petition at the earliest. ¶35

Arun Pandey Vs The State of Bihar — Writ and Judicial Review | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15596 of 2025

¶2

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

¶3

Arun Pandey S/o Kamla Pandey, R/o- 10, Basauti, Circle- Prasa, Shobhepur, Saran, Bihar- 841311.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶8

The District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra.

¶9

The Additional District Magistrate, Saran at Chapra.

¶10

The District Panchayati Raj Officer, Saran at Chapra.

¶11

¶12

The Circle Officer, Parsa, Saran at Chapra.

¶13

The Block Panchayat Raj Officer, Parsa, Saran at Chapra.

¶14

... ... Respondent/s

¶15

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

¶16

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Avinash Kumar Pandey, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anirban Kundu, SC-24 ======================================================

¶17

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶18

2 14-10-2025

¶19

The instant writ application has been filed under Arti-

¶20

cle 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following re-

¶21

liefs:-

¶22

“I. For the issuance of writ in the nature of Mandamus for commanding the Respondent authorities to stop the construction work of the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan over the land of the Petitioner situated in Mauza-Basauti, Khata no.-48, Plot no.-258, area- 15 kattha 1 dhur, which was originally settled in the name of grandfather of the Petitioner namely Banwari Pandey.

¶23

II. For the issuance of writ in the nature of Mandamus for commanding and directing the Respondent authorities

¶24

Patna High Court CWJC No.15596 of 2025(2) dt.14-10-2025 2/3

¶25

to refrain from dispossessing the Petitioner and his family from the land situated in Mauza- Basauti, Khata no.-48, Plot no.-258, area- 15 kattha 1 dhur.

¶26

III. For the issuance of writ in the nature of Mandamus to the respondent authorities to refrain from constructing the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan over the afore-said land until the Title Suit no.-291 of 2025, which is pending before the SubJudge-I, Civil Court, Chapra, is decided and a final decree is passed by the Ld. Civil Court.

¶27

IV. For any other order/orders, relief reliefs or direction/directions, which may deemed fit to this Hon'ble Court in the instant case.”

¶28

Mr. Avinash Kumar Pandey, learned counsel ap-

¶29

pearing for the petitioner and Mr. Anirban Kundu, SC-24 learned counsel for the State-respondents are present and they are heard.

¶30

The main grievance raised by the petitioner is that the respondent authorities have started the construction work of the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan over the land of the petitioner situated in Mauza-Basauti, pertaining to Khata No. 48, Plot No. 258, Area-15 Kattha 1 dhur, and according to the petitioner, the said land was originally settled in the name of his grandfather and since then, the petitioner and his family members have been in possession and having title to it.

¶31

From the perusal of the writ petition, it appears that

¶32

Patna High Court CWJC No.15596 of 2025(2) dt.14-10-2025 3/3

¶33

the petitioner has also filed a title suit before the court of Sub Judge-I, Chapra which is currently pending and the issues raised in the present writ application are also under consideration in the said civil suit and it is also revealed by petitioner’s counsel that the petitioner has filed an injunction petition in the said title suit and arguments on that petition have been heard twice by the Presiding Officer of the Court of Sub Judge-I, Chapra.

¶34

Considering these aspects, this Court does not find it appropriate to invoke its writ jurisdiction at this stage in the aforesaid matter and it is expected from the Court of Sub JudgeI, Chapra that the petitioner’s injunction petition will be decided at the earliest.

¶35

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶36

(Shailendra Singh, J)

¶37

siddharthkr/-

¶38

Arun Pandey v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Pandey v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abu Muaz @ Abu Maz @ Abu Maz Sajdi Vs The State of Bihar

Singheshwar Choudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Anil Kumar Chaurasia Vs The State of Bihar

Bachandev Yadav @ Bachho Mahto @ Bachandeo Yadav Vs The Union of India

Dr. Phulo Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Parmanand Sah @ Prama Nand Prasad Vs The State of Bihar