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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No writ adjudication or delivery of possession ordered; respondent Nos. 4 (Dy-Collector Land Reform, Danapur), 6 (Circle Officer, Danapur Circle) and 8 (S.H.O., P.S.- Shahpur) directed to dispose of the petitioner's representations as per the provisions of law and take them to a logical end within eight weeks of receipt/production of the Court's order; writ petition disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether, under Article 226, the Court should command the respondent authorities (especially respondent Nos. 4, 6 and 8) to deliver possession of the petitioner's purchased land (Mauza-Sarari, Khata No. 215, Khesra No. 29 (Part), Area 1.5 Decimal, P.S. Shahpur, Danapur, Patna) and remove the encroachment/obstruction attributed to respondent No. 10 (Smt. Geeta Devi), including action against her for the encroachment.

Court's answer

The Court held that the issue raised by the petitioner in this writ petition is premature for consideration under the writ jurisdiction of this Court, and therefore did not adjudicate the possession/encroachment grievance itself.

Ratio / Principle

Instead of adjudication, respondent Nos. 4, 6 & 8 were directed to dispose of the petitioner's representations, which had been filed before them, as per the provisions of law.

Key takeaways

Those representations were to be taken to a logical end within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the Court's order or production of the same.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court, CWJC No.19874 of 2025, oral order dated 09-12-2025, Justice Shailendra Singh: Petitioner Anuradha Kumari, purchaser of 1.5 decimal of land (Mauza-Sarari, Paragana-Phulwari, Thana No. 44, Khata No. 215, Khesra No. 29 (Part), Registry Office Danapur, present P.S. Shahpur, Patna) from respondent No. 9 (Ramjee Singh) by sale-deed dated 15.02.2014, sought Article 226 writ-directions commanding delivery of possession of her purchased land and removal of the alleged encroachment/obstruction by respondent No. 10 (Smt. Geeta Devi), plus action against the encroacher. Holding the grievance premature for consideration under the Court's writ jurisdiction, the Court did not adjudicate it; it disposed of the petition while directing respondent Nos. 4 (Dy-Collector Land Reform, Danapur), 6 (Circle Officer, Danapur Circle) and 8 (S.H.O., P.S.- Shahpur, Danapur) to dispose of the representations the petitioner had filed before them as per the provisions of law and take them to a logical end within eight weeks from receipt or production of the Court's order.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19874 of 2025

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

Anuradha Kumari, Wife of Raj Kishore Prasad, Resident of Village - Bailey Road, Durga Ashram Gali, Sheikhpura, P.O.- B.V. College, P.S.- Shastrinagar, District- Patna, Bihar- 800014.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar through Additional Chief Secretary, Revenue and Land Reform Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

The Collector-cum-District Magistrate, District- Patna.

The Additional Collector-cum-Additional District Magistrate, DistrictPatna.

The Dy-Collector Land Reform, Danapur, District- Patna.

The Sub-Divisional Officer-cum-Sub Divisional Magistrate Danapur, District- Patna.

The Circle Officer, Danapur Circle, District- Patna.

The Senior Superintendent of Police, District- Patna.

The S.H.O., P.S.- Shahpur, Danapur, District- Patna.

Ramjee Singh, Son of Kewal Bhagat @ Kewal Singh @ Kewal Rai, Resident of Village- Usari, P.O.- Sikarpur, P S.-Shahpur, Danapur, DistrictPatna.

Smt. Geeta Devi, Wife of- Indradeo Yadav, Resident of Mohalla- Judges Colony, Bailey Road, Danapur, Post- Danapur Cant, P.S.- Danapur, DistrictPatna.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nityanand Mishra, Adv. Mr. Alok Abhinav, Adv. Ms. Diksha Kumari, Adv. For the State : Mr. Manish Kumar, GP-4 Mr. Ajay Kumar, AC to GP-4 ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER

2 09-12-2025 The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs :-

“ 1) For issuance of appropriate writ/writs in the nature of mandamus commanding/directing the respondent authorities

Patna High Court CWJC No.19874 of 2025(2) dt.09-12-2025 2/3

concerned especially the DCLR, Danapur, Patna (Respondent No.4), C.O., Danapur Circle, Patna (Respondent No. 6) and S.H.O., P.S.- Shahpur, Danapur, Patna (Respondent No. 8) to deliver possession to the petitioner on her purchased land bearing Mauza-Sarari, Paragana- Phulwari, Thana No.- 44, Khata No.- 215, Khesra No.- 29 (Part), Area- 1.5 Decimal situated under jurisdiction of Survey Thana and Registry Office-Danapur, Present P.S.- Shahpur, Danapur, District- Patna which was purchased by the petitioner on 15.02.2014 through the sale-deed from Ramjee Singh (Respondent No. 9).

(II) For further direction to the respondent authorities concerned to remove the illegal encroachment/obstruction made by the Respondent No. 10 (Geeta Devi) on the land in question and give the peaceful possession to the petitioner on his own purchased land of the petitioner bearing Mauza-Sarari, ParaganaPhulwari, Thana No.-44, Khata No.- 215, Khesra No.-29 (Part), Area- 1.5 Decimal, situated under jurisdiction of Survey Thana and Registry OfficeDanapur, Present P.S.- Shahpur, Danapur, DistrictPatna which was purchased by the petitioner on 15.02.2014 through the sale-deed from Ramjee Singh (Respondent No. 9).

(III) For further directing the concerned respondent authority to take appropriate action against the private respondent no. 10 (Geeta Devi), for encroaching the land in question of the petitioner as the respondent no. 10 is powerful/influential lady and always indulge in illegal works and they have encroached the said land forcefully by using muscles men.

Patna High Court CWJC No.19874 of 2025(2) dt.09-12-2025 3/3

(IV) For any other relief/reliefs for which the petitioner is entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the case and also in accordance with law. ”

2. Mr. Nityanand Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Manish Kumar, learned GP-4 for the Staterespondents, are present and they are heard.

3. The main grievance raised by the petitioner in this writ petition is an encroachment allegedly made by the respondent No. 10 over her land and further, creating obstacle in the possession of the petitioner over her purchased land.

4. This Court is of the view that the issue raised by the petitioner in this writ petition is premature for consideration under writ jurisdiction of this Court, however, the respondent Nos. 4, 6 & 8 are directed to dispose of the petitioner’s representations, which have been filed before them by the petitioner as revealed by him, as per the provisions of law and take them to a logical end within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Court’s order or production of the same. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands disposed of.

(Shailendra Singh, J)

annu/- U