Disposed¶33

Devaki Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC17 Nov 2025CWJC/17622/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court; CWJC No.17622 of 2025; Justice Shailendra Singh; decided 17-11-2025; Article 226; mandamus; Additional Collector Gaya; Appeal Case No. 85/2022; Mutation Case Nos. 82/2014-15 and 98/2014-15; Circle Officer Tekari; Vimal Yadav; pendency of over three years; expeditious disposal; four-month time limit; writ petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Additional Collector, Gaya to expedite Appeal Case No. 85 of 2022 and dispose of it within the next four months from the date of receipt or production of the copy of the order; the writ petition otherwise disposed of. ¶33

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶33

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners are entitled to a direction that their Appeal Case No. 85 of 2022, pending before the Additional Collector, Gaya and undecided for the last three years, be decided expeditiously. +1 more

¶28

Court's answer

The petitioners' right for expeditious disposal of their appeal is being violated; accordingly the Additional Collector, Gaya is directed to expedite Appeal Case No. 85 of 2022.

¶29

Ratio / Principle

The issue under challenge in Appeal Case No. 85 of 2022, raised by the petitioners in the writ petition, is premature for consideration by the court under writ jurisdiction.

¶29

Key takeaways

Appeal Case No. 85 of 2022 is to be disposed of within the next four months from the date of receipt or production of the copy of the order.ratio¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

PATNA HIGH COURT (Shailendra Singh, J) | CWJC No.17622 of 2025, decided 17-11-2025 | Disposed of. Petitioners Devaki Yadav, Rambabu and Suresh Yadav filed a writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a mandamus directing the Additional Collector, Gaya to decide their Appeal Case No. 85/2022, pending for more than three years, against orders passed by the Circle Officer, Tekari in Mutation Case Nos. 82/2014-15 and 98/2014-15, whereby their private lands were alleged to have been fraudulently and illegally mutated in favour of Respondent No. 7 (Vimal Yadav). The Court held that the issue under challenge in the appeal was premature for consideration under writ jurisdiction, but that the petitioners' right to expeditious disposal of the appeal stood violated, and directed the Additional Collector, Gaya to expedite Appeal Case No. 85 of 2022 and dispose of it within four months from receipt or production of the order's copy.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17622 of 2025

¶2

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

¶3

Devaki Yadav, Son of Late Sarju Ray, R/o Village- Lao, P.S.- Tikari, District- Gaya.

¶4

Rambabu, Son of Late Nanhu Yadav, R/o Village- Lao, P.S.- Tikari, DistrictGaya.

¶5

Suresh Yadav, S/o- Late Nanhku Yadav, R/o Village- Lao, P.S.- Tikari, District- Gaya.

¶6

... ... Petitioner/s

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Land Revenue and Reforms Dept., Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶9

The District Magistrate, Gaya.

¶10

The Senior Superintendent of Police, Gaya.

¶11

The Additional Collector, Gaya.

¶12

The Circle Officer, Tikari, Gaya.

¶13

The S.H.O., Tikari, P.S.- Tikari, Distric- Gaya.

¶14

Vimal Yadav, S/o Late Shiv Yadav, R/o Village and P.O.- Lao, P.S.- Tikari, District- Gaya.

¶15

Doman Chamar, Son of Musan Chamar, R/o village Salempur, P.S. Tikari, District Gaya.

¶16

Anuj Prasad Singh, Son of Late Ragho Singh, R/o Noni, P.S. Tikari, District Gaya.

¶17

... ... Respondent/s

¶18

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Subhash Prasad Singh, GA-3 Mr. Indeshwari Prasad Thakur, AC to GA-3 ======================================================

¶19

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶20

2 17-11-2025

¶21

The instant writ application has been filed under

¶22

Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioners seeking the following relief(s):

¶23

"1. (i) For issuance of mandamus to the respondent no 4 as the petitioner filed appeal case no 85/2022 in

¶24

Patna High Court CWJC No.17622 of 2025(2) dt.17-11-2025 2/3

¶25

the court of Additional Collector Gaya itself against order passed in mutation case no 82/2014-15 and mutation case no 98 /2014-15 of circle officer Tekari Gaya whereby the CO Tekari in the most fraudulent and illegal manner mutated private lands of these petitioners in favor of respondent no 7 but the aforesaid appeal pending for more than 3 years causing ultimate hardships to the petitioner.

¶26

(ii) For any other relief/reliefs as your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the fact and circumstances of the case"

¶27

2. Mr. Rajesh Kumar learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Subhash Prasad Singh, learned counsel appearing for the State-respondents are present and they are heard.

¶28

3. The main issue raised by the petitioner in this writ petition is that their appeal No. 85 of 2022 pending before the Additional Collector, Gaya is not being decided for the last three years due to which the respondents are harassing the petitioners.

¶29

4. Though, the issue which is under challenge in appeal Case No. 85 of 2022 and raised by the petitioners in this writ petition is premature for consideration by this court under writ jurisdiction, however, petitioners' right for expeditious disposal of his appeal is being violated, so, the Additional Collector, Gaya, is directed to expedite the petitioners' Appeal

¶30

Patna High Court CWJC No.17622 of 2025(2) dt.17-11-2025 3/3

¶31

Case No. 85 of 2022 and dispose of the same in the next four months from the date of receipt or production of the order's copy.

¶32

5. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands

¶33

disposed of.

¶34

(Shailendra Singh, J)

¶35

Rajiv/-