Disposed¶33

Hriday Uranw v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC19 Feb 2026CWJC/2672/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Easementary right of access to road; land settlement grievance to be pursued before competent Civil Court, not writ jurisdiction; Settlement Cancellation Appeal No.02/2025 rejected by District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Kaimur (Bhabua) by order dated 27.03.2025; antecedent Settlement Case No. 01/2023-24; settled land Khata No. 148, Plot No. 1483, Mauza- Aghaura, 16 dissmil, Adhaura, Kaimur; petitioner chose wrong platform; writ petition disposed of with liberty to seek civil-court remedy.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy before the competent Civil Court having jurisdiction. ¶33

Hriday Uranw Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy before the competent Civil Court having jurisdiction.

¶33

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 27.03.2025 of the Collector-Cum-District Magistrate, Kaimur (Bhabua) rejecting Settlement Cancellation Appeal No.02/2025 suffers from any infirmity warranting interference through the present writ petition. +1 more

¶26

Court's answer

The Court finds no infirmity in the order of the District Magistrate-cum-Collector dated 27.03.2025 dismissing Settlement Cancellation Appeal No. 02 of 2025.

¶28

Ratio / Principle

Having admitted that a house of the other settlee was built up before the land was settled in his favour, and since houses of other raiyats were already in existence in the vicinity of the land, the petitioner chose the wrong platform in seeking access to the road through the writ petition.

¶31

Key takeaways

Where the petitioner's easementary right is affected, his remedy lies before the competent Civil Court having jurisdiction.ratio¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

PATNA HIGH COURT (Purnendu Singh, J) — Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2672 of 2026, decided 19-02-2026 (oral order). The petitioner, whose settlement of land appertaining to Khata No. 148, Plot No. 1483, Mauza- Aghaura (total area 16 dissmil) flowed from an order in Settlement Case No. 01/2023-24, challenged the order dated 27.03.2025 of the Collector-Cum-District Magistrate, Kaimur (Bhabua) rejecting his Settlement Cancellation Appeal No.02/2025. Held: (i) no infirmity was found in the District Magistrate-cum-Collector's order, which proceeded on the finding that the road is accessible from the plot in question from the south, over which houses of other raiyat are built; (ii) the petitioner having himself admitted that a house of the other settlee was built up before the settlement, and other raiyats' houses already existing in the vicinity, the writ petition was the wrong platform for his grievance of access to the road; (iii) where his easementary right is affected, his remedy lies before the competent Civil Court having jurisdiction. The writ petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2672 of 2026

¶2

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

¶3

Hriday Uranw Son of Rampati Uranw, Resident of village Adhaura, Kaimur (Bhabua) Adhaura, P.0. and P.S. Adhaura, District- Kaimur, Bihar- 821102.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar.

¶7

The Collector -Cum- District-Magistrate, Kaimur (Bhabua).

¶8

The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Kaimur (Bhabua).

¶9

The Circle Officer, Bhabua, District- Kaimur.

¶10

Chitra Kala Devi, Wife of Chote Lal Uranw Resident of village- Adhaura, P.O. and P.S.- Adhaura District- Kaimur (Bhabua).

¶11

Basanti Devi, Wife of Binod Uranw Resident of village- Adhaura, P.O. and P.S.- Adhaura District- Kaimur (Bhabua).

¶12

Sugia Devi, Wife of Ram Prawesh Uranw Resident of village- Adhaura, P.O. and P.S.- Adhaura District- Kaimur (Bhabua).

¶13

Fulmatiya Devi, Wife of Ram Prawesh Uranw Resident of village- Adhaura, P.O. and P.S.- Adhaura District- Kaimur (Bhabua).

¶14

Urmila Devi, Wife of Vijay Uranw Resident of village- Adhaura, P.O. and P.S.- Adhaura District- Kaimur (Bhabua).

¶15

Fulpati Devi, Wife of Radheshyam Uranw Resident of village- Adhaura, P.O. and P.S.- Adhaura District- Kaimur (Bhabua).

¶16

... ... Respondent/s

¶17

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

¶18

Appearance :

¶19

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Tiwari, Advocate For the Respondent/s : AC to Government Pleader (26) ======================================================

¶20

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶21

2 19-02-2026 Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel

¶22

appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned AC to Government Pleader (26) for the State.

¶23

The petitioner in paragraph no. 1 of the present writ

¶24

petition has sought inter alia the following relief(s), which is reproduced hereinafter:-

¶25

Patna High Court CWJC No.2672 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026 2/3

¶26

"That the instant writ petition is being filed in this Hon'ble Court against the Order dated 27.03.2025 passed by the learned Collector-Cum-District Magistrate Kaimur (Bhabua) in Settlement Cancellation Appeal No.02/2025 whereby learned Collector after hearing the case erroneously and illegally rejected the Appeal and submitted that it is clear from the record that in the proposal the said settlement holder has been consider in the suitable category /well deserve category and settlement has been made in his name, as far as the Appellant has stated in his statement that the southern paved road of settlement holder Khesra No.1483 in which villagers and Appellants used for coming and going are said to blocked while on the other hand it is pointed out that settlement holder are ineligible category land holder and settlement of land should be allotted to landless person of the eligible category which is contradict each other. There is no obstruction to reach the paved rural road constructed from the settlement land."

¶27

The Settlement Cancellation Appeal No. 02 of 2025 of the petitioner has been rejected by the District Magistratecum-Collector vide order dated 27.03.2025 taking into consideration the information that the settlement, which was made in respect of the land appertaining to Khata No. 148, Plot No. 1483, Mauza- Aghaura measuring total area 16 dissmil, which the petitioner claim, after order passed in Settlement Case No. 01/2023-24, it was found that the road is accessible from the plot in question from south, over which houses of other raiyat are built and the petitioner is aggrieved of his easementary right to access to the road.

¶28

I don't find any infirmity in the order of the District Magistrate-cum-Collector, who vide order dated 27.03.2025

¶29

Patna High Court CWJC No.2672 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026 3/3

¶30

dismissed the Settlement Cancellation Appeal No. 02 of 2025 filed by the petitioner.

¶31

The petitioner having admitted that before the land was settled in his favour, house of the other settlee was built up. Since houses of other raiyats were already in existence in the vicinity of the land, for access of the road, the petitioner has chosen wrong platform.

¶32

The petitioner's easementary right is affected, he has remedy before the competent Civil Court having jurisdiction.

¶33

Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy.

¶34

(Purnendu Singh, J)

¶35

Niraj/-

¶36

Hriday Uranw v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hriday Uranw 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

Sonu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Chandra Bhushan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Vidyanand Das @ Bidhyanand Das Vs The Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Limited

Rakesh Narayan Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Nitu Jain Vs The State of Bihar

Paritosh Chand Das @ Pritosh Chand Das Vs The State of Bihar