Disposed¶21

Vishwa Nath Prasad v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC23 Mar 2026CWJC/20082/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Drainage constructed on raiyati land without NOC; mandamus to consider representation; writ disposed with liberty to file fresh representation before District Magistrate, Motihari, East Champaran; reasoned order within three months after hearing and consideration of documents; Patna High Court; CWJC No. 20082 of 2021; Sourendra Pandey, J.; decision dated 23-03-2026.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the District Magistrate, Motihari, East Champaran raising all grievances; the District Magistrate to consider the case on the documents produced, after affording an opportunity of hearing, and pass a reasoned order within three months from the date of production of the order. ¶21

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue upon the respondent authorities to consider the petitioner's grievances raised by representation (Annexure-1 to the writ petition). +1 more

¶16

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the District Magistrate, Motihari, East Champaran with a fresh representation raising all his grievances as raised in the present application.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

The District Magistrate shall consider the petitioner's case after taking into account the documents produced by him, after giving him an opportunity of hearing, and pass a reasoned order within three months from the date of production of the present order.

¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Sourendra Pandey, J.) disposed of Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 20082 of 2021, in which the petitioners sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to consider their grievances, raised by representation (Annexure-1), that a drainage had been constructed on their raiyati land without their NOC and that no steps had been taken to stop the construction despite objections. The State (AC to AAG-12) did not oppose disposal with liberty. The Court granted the petitioners liberty to approach the District Magistrate, Motihari, East Champaran with a fresh representation raising all grievances, and directed the District Magistrate to consider the case after taking into account the documents produced, after giving an opportunity of hearing, and to pass a reasoned order within three months from the date of production of the Court's order.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20082 of 2021

¶2

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

¶3

Vishwa Nath Prasad son of Late Kripa Mahto @ Late Kripa Shankar Prasad, Resident of Kh no. 48/17 Gali 37 F2, B Block, near Balaji Mandir, Kaushik Enclave Burari North Delhi, Delhi. At present resident of A-38, B-7, Shalimar Garokh Ext-2 Sahibabad Gaziabad (U.P.).

¶4

Vijay Kumar Prasad Son of late Kripa Mahto @ Late Kripa Shankar Prasad Resident of Kh no. 48/17 Gali 37 F2, B Block, near Balaji Mandir, Kaushik Enclave Burari North Delhi, Delhi. At present resident of A-38, B-7, Shalimar Garokh Ext-2 Sahibabad Gaziabad (U.P.).

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate, Motihari.

¶8

The District Magistrate, Motihari.

¶9

The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sikarhanna, East Champaran.

¶10

The Circle Officer, Dhaka, East Champaran.

¶11

... ... Respondent/s

¶12

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Usha Kumari Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Md. Khurshid Alam, AAG-12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶13

4 23-03-2026

¶14

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶15

The petitioner has filed the present application for

¶16

issuance of a writ of mandamus upon the respondent authorities to consider his grievances, which have been raised by filing a representation, one being Annexure-1 to the writ petition.

¶17

From the contents of the pleadings made in the writ application, it seems that the petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that a drainage is constructed on his raiyati land without his NOC and to which he has been objecting to, however, despite

¶18

Patna High Court CWJC No.20082 of 2021(4) dt.23-03-2026 2/2

¶19

raising his grievances before the respondent authorities, no steps have been taken to stop such construction.

¶20

Learned AC to AAG-12 does not oppose the fact that the writ petition be disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to approach the District Magistrate, Motihari, East Champaran, with a fresh representation raising all his grievances as raised in the present application, who shall consider the case of the petitioner after taking into account the documents produced by him and after giving him an opportunity of hearing and pass a reasoned order within three months from the date/production of the present order.

¶21

The application stands disposed off with the aforesaid liberty.

¶22

(Sourendra Pandey, J)

¶23

manoj/-

¶24

Vishwa Nath Prasad v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishwa Nath Prasad 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Uttam Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Varun Mandal @ Barun Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Amlesh Kumar @ Karan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sharad Chandra Mishra Vs The State of Bihar

Shivnandan Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Neha Devi Vs The State of Bihar