Disposed¶29

Tajwa v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC24 Jul 2026CWJC/3491/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court; CWJC No.3491 of 2025; Tajwa v. State of Bihar; encroachment; Gairmazarua land; Mauza Pindhaul; Azamnagar Circle; Katihar; Circle Officer; representation dated 10.11.2024; Annexure P/2; mandamus; disposal with direction; eight weeks; Vikash Kumar, J; order dated 24-07-2026.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent no. 4, the Circle Officer, Azamgarh, Katihar, to consider the petitioner's representation and, if any action is warranted, to take appropriate step in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks. ¶29

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should be issued for removal of the alleged encroachment over the land in Mauza-Pindhaul, Khata No. 381, Khesra No. 888, under Azamnagar Circle, Katihar, said to have been encroached by 'muscle men' of the village and to obstruct ingress and outgress of villagers. +1 more

¶21

Ratio / Principle

The writ application is disposed of with a direction to respondent no. 4, the Circle Officer, Azamgarh, Katihar, to consider the petitioner's representation and to take appropriate step in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks.

¶29

Key takeaways

The petitioner's representation dated 10.11.2024 (Annexure P/2) had not been acted upon; no action had been taken by the respondent authority till the date of the order.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Vikash Kumar, J), order dated 24-07-2026 in Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3491 of 2025 (Tajwa v. The State of Bihar and others): disposed of the writ petition in which the petitioner sought mandamus for removal of alleged encroachment by 'muscle men' over Gairmazarua land in Mauza Pindhaul (Ward No. 5, Thana No. 447, Khata No. 381, Khesra No. 888, Area 1 Acre 98 Decimal) under Azamnagar Circle, Katihar, and for decision of representations dated 09.03.2013 and 10.11.2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner confined the prayer to consideration of his representation by the respondent authority. Noting that the representation dated 10.11.2024 (Annexure P/2) had drawn no action, the Court directed respondent no. 4, the Circle Officer, Azamgarh, Katihar, to consider the representation and take appropriate step in accordance with law within eight weeks. The Court did not itself adjudicate the encroachment; no statute or precedent was cited.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3491 of 2025

¶2

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

¶3

Tajwa Son of Late Naseer, Resident of Village- Pindhal, Police StationAzamnagar, District- Katihar.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, and Reforms and Survey Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The Collector, Katihar.

¶8

The Sub Divisional Officer, Barsoi, Katihar.

¶9

The Circle Officer, Azamnagar, Katihar.

¶10

... ... Respondent/s

¶11

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

¶12

Appearance :

¶13

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bijay Kumar Pandey, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Standing Counsel 22

¶14

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

¶15

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH KUMAR

¶16

ORAL ORDER

¶17

2 24-07-2026

¶18

Heard Sri Bijay Kumar Pandey, Mr. Abdul Waadood

¶19

and Sri Dharmendar Kumar Sinha, learned advocates for the petitioner and Sri Raghawendra Kumar, learned advocate for the State.

¶20

The petitioner in the present writ petition has prayed for the following reliefs:-

¶21

i) For issuance of an appropriate writ/writs in the nature of mandamus for removing the Encroachment over the land situated in Mauza-Pindhaul Khata No. 381 , Khesra No. 888 under Azamnagar Circle, Katihar, which has been encroached by muscle men of Village, obstructing in ingress and outgress of villagers.

¶22

(ii) Further for issuance of an appropriate writ/writ in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the Respondents to decide the representations dated 09.03.2013 and 10.11.2024 filed by petitioner and villagers for removing encroachment over Gairmazarua land situated in Mauza Pindhaul, Ward No. 5, Thana No. 447, Khata No. 381, Khesra No. 888 Area 1 Acre 98 Decimal has been encroached by the muscle men of villagers, which obstruct the villagers from ingress and outgress of Villagers.

¶23

Patna High Court CWJC No.3491 of 2025(2) dt.24-07-2026 2/2

¶24

(iii) Further for a direction to the Respondents either initiate he remove the encroachment or encroachment against the encroachers and decide the same according to law.

¶25

(iv) For any other relief/reliefs for which the petitioner is entitled to get in the facts stated above.

¶26

At the outset, the learned counsel for petitioner

¶27

confines his prayer for consideration of his representation by respondent authority.

¶28

The petitioner has filed his representation on 10.11.2024, which forms as Annexure P/2 to the writ application. Till date, no action has been taken by the respondent authority.

¶29

Accordingly, the present writ application is disposed of with direction to respondent no. 4 i.e., Circle Officer, Azamgarh, Katihar to consider the representation of the petitioner and if any action is accentuated, then to take appropriate step in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks.

¶30

(Vikash Kumar, J)

¶31

Ashwin/-

¶32

Tajwa v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tajwa 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

Subodhkant Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Nasim Ahmed Vs The State of Bihar

Uttam Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Akhilesh Chandra Vs The State of Bihar

Mohamad Isatiyak @ Md. Isatiyak Vs The State of Bihar

Pankaj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar