Pankaj Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC24 Jul 2026CWJC/3640/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Encroachment on Government/public land (Aam Gairmajarua Land); Bihar public land encroachment Act; Mauza Bhagwanpur; Kheshra No 371; circle office Chakia; East Champaran; Motihari; Pipra Police Station; writ of mandamus; representation to be filed within two weeks; disposal of representation after hearing within eight weeks; writ petition disposed of; Patna High Court; Vikash Kumar, J; CWJC No. 3640 of 2025; decision date 24-07-2026.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to file a representation for removal of encroachment from the public land in question (Mauza Bhagwanpur, Kheshra no. 371) within two weeks, and the respondent authorities directed to dispose of the representation after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing within eight weeks. ¶¶26

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents should initiate and conclude encroachment proceedings under the Bihar public land encroachment Act against persons encroaching upon the Government land (Aam Gairmajarua Land) public road at Mauza Bhagwanpur, Kheshra No 371, under the jurisdiction of circle office Chakia, East Champaran.

¶¶20

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation for removal of encroachment from the public land in question, rather than the Court directly ordering initiation of encroachment proceedings.

¶¶26

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is permitted to file the representation concerning Mauza Bhagwanpur Kheshra no. 371 within a period of two weeks.

¶¶26

Key takeaways

The respondent authorities are obliged to dispose of the representation after affording an opportunity of hearing to the applicant/petitioner within a reasonable period of eight weeks.ratio¶¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Patna (Vikash Kumar, J.), CWJC No. 3640 of 2025, decided 24-07-2026 — Pankaj Kumar v. The State of Bihar and others. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to initiate, and expeditiously conclude, encroachment proceedings under the Bihar public land encroachment Act against persons who had encroached upon Government land (Aam Gairmajarua Land) forming a public road at Mauza Bhagwanpur, Kheshra No 371, under the jurisdiction of circle office Chakia, East Champaran. At the outset the petitioner confined his prayer to consideration of his representation. The Court disposed of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation for removal of encroachment from the public land in question within two weeks, and the respondent authorities were obliged to dispose of the representation after affording the applicant/petitioner an opportunity of hearing within a reasonable period of eight weeks.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3640 of 2025

¶2

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

¶3

Pankaj Kumar Son of Lal Babu Sah, resident of village - Bhagwanpur, P.O.Pipra, P.S. - Pipra, District - East Champaran at Present Address- Mathiya Zirat, P.S. - Motihari Town, District - East Champaran.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar Bihar.

¶7

The District Collector, Motihari, East Champaran.

¶8

The Superintendent Police Officer, Motihari, East Champaran.

¶9

The Sub Divisional Police Officer, Motihari, East Champaran.

¶10

The Sub Divisional Officer (S.D.O.) Chakiya, East Champaran.

¶11

The Circle Officer Chakiya, East Champaran.

¶12

The Officer Incharge, Pipra Police Station, East Champaran.

¶13

... ... Respondent/s

¶14

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

¶15

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pravin Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, GP-24 ======================================================

¶16

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶17

2 24-07-2026 Heard Mr. Pravin Kumar, learned counsel for the

¶18

petitioner and Mr. Sarvesh Kumar, GP-24, learned counsel for the State.

¶19

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

¶20

“I. For issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing to the respondents to initiate an encroachment proceeding under the Bihar public land encroachment Act against the persons who have encroach the Government Land (Aam Gairmajarua Land) public road situated under Mauza Bhagwanpur, Kheshra No 371 comes under the jurisdiction of circle office Chakia, East Champaran.

¶21

II. For issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus Commanding and directing the respondents to

¶22

Patna High Court CWJC No.3640 of 2025(2) dt.24-07-2026 2/2

¶23

conclude the encroachment proceeding under the Bihar public land encroachment Act as possible earlier and remove the encroachment from the Government Land (Aam Gairmajarua Land) public road situated under Mauza Bhagwanpur, Kheshra No 371 comes under the jurisdiction of circle office Chakia, East Champaran.

¶24

III. For grant of any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is entitle from the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶25

The petitioner at the outset confines his prayer for

¶26

consideration of his representation by the respondents. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation for removal of encroachment from the public land in question situated under Mauza Bhagwanpur Kheshra no. 371 within a period of two weeks and the respondent authorities are obliged to disposed of the representation after affording the opportunity of hearing to the applicant/petitioner within a reasonable period of eight weeks.

¶27

(Vikash Kumar, J)

¶28

sweta/-

¶29

Pankaj Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj Kumar 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

Statutes considered

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

Mukesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar