Disposed¶20

Shanti Devi v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC2 Feb 2026CWJC/8895/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court CWJC 8895/2017 (Rajiv Roy, J., order dated 02-02-2026) - Shanti Devi v. State of Bihar - consolidation records: prayer for correction of Chak Khatiyan (Chak Khata No. 486, Chak Khesara No. 361, 6 decimal, recorded as Anabad Bihar Sarkar) and demand register (3 decimal shown as 6 dec.); petition disposed on petitioner's opting for alternate remedy, with eight-week window and direction that one-decade pendency of the writ petition be considered on limitation; no merits adjudicated; no statute or precedent discussed.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to avail the alternate remedy; if the petition is preferred before the concerned authority/Court within eight weeks, the delay/limitation is to be considered in light of the writ petition having remained pending for the last one decade. ¶20

Shanti Devi Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents can be directed by writ of mandamus to make necessary correction in the Chak Khatiyan prepared by the Consolidation Authorities, whereby land appertaining to Chak Khata No. 486, Chak Khesara No. 361, Area 6 decimal was recorded in the name of Anabad Bihar Sarkar in place of the petitioner, who claims exclusive possession. +1 more

¶13

Ratio / Principle

Since learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he would avail the alternate remedy, the Court granted said liberty and disposed of the writ petition without adjudicating the merits of the claimed corrections.

¶20

Key takeaways

If the petitioner prefers the petition before the authority/Court concerned within the next eight weeks, that forum shall take into account, while dealing with any limitation objection, that the writ petition had remained pending before the High Court for the last one decade.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (CWJC No.8895 of 2017, Patna High Court, Rajiv Roy, J., 02-02-2026): Petitioner sought mandamus for correction of the Chak Khatiyan prepared by the Consolidation Authorities, whereby land appertaining to Chak Khata No. 486, Chak Khesara No. 361 (Area 6 decimal) stood recorded as Anabad Bihar Sarkar despite her alleged exclusive possession, and for correction of the demand register showing 3 decimal land as 6 decimal in her favour. After some argument, counsel for the petitioner elected to pursue the alternate remedy; the Court granted that liberty and disposed of the writ petition without deciding the merits. It further directed that if the petition is preferred before the concerned authority/Court within eight weeks, the decade-long pendency of the writ petition in the High Court shall be taken into account while dealing with any limitation plea.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8895 of 2017

¶2

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

Shanti Devi

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar and Ors

¶7

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Javed Jafar Khan, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, GP-14 ======================================================

¶8

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY

ORAL ORDER

4 02-02-2026

Heard the parties.

The present application has been preferred for the following relief(s):

¶13

for issuance of an appropriate writ/s, order/s, direction/s including a writ preferably in the nature of Mandamus directing and commanding upon the Respondents to make necessary correction in Chak Khatiyan prepared by the Consolidation Authorities whereby and where under land appertaining to Chak Khata No. 486, Chak Khesara No. 361, Area 6 decimal has been recorded in the name of Anabad Bihar Sarkar in place of the petitioner which is in her exclusive possession.

¶14

Further the respondents may be directed to make correction in demand Register wherein 3 decimal land has been

¶15

Patna High Court CWJC No.8895 of 2017(4) dt.02-02-2026

¶16

2/2

¶17

wrongly mentioned as 6 dec. in favour of the petitioner taking into the consideration that land in question is peaceful possession after the death of her father in law in whose favour land was settled by ex land lord.

¶18

The petitioner seeks indulgence of this Hon'ble court to grant him any other relief/s to which he is entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶19

After some argument, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he shall be availing alternate remedy.

¶20

Granting said liberty, the writ petition is disposed

¶21

of.

¶22

If the petition is preferred in next eight weeks, the authority/Court concerned shall take into account that the writ petition was pending before this Court for the last one decade while taking up the limitation petition.

¶23

(Rajiv Roy, J)

¶24

Vijay Singh/-

¶25

Shanti Devi v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shanti Devi v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

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

Shailendra Kumar Singh and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ramesh Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Vishwanath Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Mrityunjay Kumar Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

Kailash Mahato Vs The State of Bihar

Devendra Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.