Baban Prasad Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Baban Prasad Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice dated 31.07.2025 issued by the Circle Officer to petitioner no.1 - concerning land the petitioners claim was exclusively settled with them by the Ex-Landlord, against Respondent no.5's asserted claim - was without jurisdiction and should be quashed by writ of certiorari.

Court's answer

A notice merely calling the petitioner to appear before the Circle Officer with documents does not justify writ intervention at this stage: the petitioner, claiming to be the owner, has the capacity to submit his supporting documents to the Circle Office, and rushing to the Court 'at the drop of the hat' is unacceptable.

Ratio / Principle

Accepting the words of both parties, the Court expected the Circle Officer, Basantpur to take the matter to its logical conclusion in accordance with law at the earliest.

Key takeaways

The writ petition was disposed of with the aforesaid observations; the notice was not quashed and the jurisdictional question was left to be resolved at the Circle Officer level after the petitioner files his documents.ratio¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1941 of 2026, High Court of Judicature at Patna (Rajiv Roy, J.), oral order dated 05.02.2026. Baban Prasad and two others sought quashing, by writ of certiorari, of a notice dated 31.07.2025 signed and issued by the Circle Officer, Basantpur, addressed to petitioner no. 1 regarding land which the petitioners claim was exclusively settled with them by the ex-landlord and over which Respondent no. 5 (Satyanarayan Singh) allegedly made a false and fictitious claim. State counsel pointed out that the notice had simply asked the petitioner to appear with his documents on 05.08.2025; instead of satisfying the Circle Office, Basantpur, Siwan, the writ petition was moved six months later. The Court held that a claimant-owner 'has all the power in the world' to submit his documents and that rushing to Court 'at the drop of the hat is unacceptable'. Taking the parties' undertakings - petitioner to appear before the Circle Officer, Basantpur with all supporting documents within two weeks, and a reasoned order to follow after hearing both sides - the Court disposed of the petition, expecting the Circle Officer to take the matter to its logical conclusion in accordance with law at the earliest. No statutory citation or precedent was invoked.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1941 of 2026

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

Baban Prasad Son of Late Bankeylal Resident of Village- Basantpur, P.S.Basantpur, District- Siwan.

Ajay Prasad, Son of Late Bihari Lal Prasad Resident of Village- Basantpur, P.S.- Basantpur, District- Siwan.

Shashi Kumar, Son of Late Lallan Prasad Resident of Village- Basantpur, P.S.- Basantpur, District- Siwan.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

The Collector, Siwan, District- Siwan.

The Additional Collector, Siwan.

The Circle Officer, Basantpur Circle, District- Siwan.

Satyanarayan Singh, Son of Late Lal Bahadur Rai Resident of VillageSipah, P.S.- Basantpur, District- Siwan.

... ... Respondent/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. B.K. Singh Chouhan, Advocate : Mr. Kumar Harsh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Standing Counsel (18)

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

2 05-02-2026

Heard Mr. B.K. Singh Chouhan, learned counsel for

the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The present petition has been preferred for the grant of following relief(s):

“for quashing the notice dated 31.07.2025 signed and issued by the Circle Officer by issuance of writ of Certiorari or any other Writ/Writs Order/Orders to the Respondents as

Patna High Court CWJC No.1941 of 2026(2) dt.05-02-2026 2/3

notice to the Petitioner no.1 is without jurisdiction and unwarranted because the land mentioned in the notice exclusively belongs to the Petitioners as settled by Ex-Landlord and any claim over it made by the Respondent no.5 is false and fictitious.”

At the outset, learned State counsel points out that a notice has simply been issued asking the petitioner to appear alongwith the document on 05.08.2025 to satisfy the said office. Instead of submitting the documents/satisfying the Circle Office, Basantpur, Siwan, six months later, the writ petition.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on the basis of a frivolous petition, notice has been issued.

This Court is of the view that a notice has been issued to the petitioner, he claims himself to the owner of the land in question, has all the power in the world to submit the document in support of his case, rushing to the Court at the drop of the hat is unacceptable.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that within a period of two weeks, the petitioner shall be appearing before the Circle Officer, Basantpur alongwith all the supporting documents.

Patna High Court CWJC No.1941 of 2026(2) dt.05-02-2026 3/3

Learned State counsel submits that if such papers are filed, after hearing the parties, a reasoned order shall be passed.

Accepting the words of both the parties and expecting the Circle Officer, Basantpur who take the matter to its logical in accordance with law at an earliest.

The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid

observation.

(Rajiv Roy, J)

vinayak/-

U