Patna High Court
Md. Nasiruddin Biswas And Ors vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 3 April, 2025
Author: Rajesh Kumar Verma
Bench: Rajesh Kumar Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.22148 of 2014
======================================================
1. Md. Nasiruddin Biswas S/o Late Haji Khushal Biswas
2. Md. Nazir
3. Md. Zahid
4. Md. Zubair All 2 to 4 Sons of Late Alauddin
5. Shafique Haque @ Md. Shafique Haque S/o Late Haji Khushal Biswas
6. Tahiruddin @ Md. Tahiruddin S/o Late Basiruddin
7. Taiyab Ali S/o Late Basiruddin
8. Jahangir S/o Late Basiruddin
9. Saidur S/o Late Basiruddin
10. Rafiqaue S/o Late Basiruddin
11. Mazahar S/o Late Ainuddin
12. Jamil S/o Late Ainuddin
13. Salauddin S/o Late Ainuddin
14. Obaidullah S/o Late Ainuddin
15. Abdul Rahman S/o Late Moulvi Maqbool Hussain
16. Umar @ Umar Farooque S/o Late Moulvi Maqbool Hussain
17. Abu Talha S/o Late Moulvi Maqbool Hussain
18. Ali Hussain S/o Late Moulvi Maqbool Hussain
19. Azad @ Md. Azad S/o Late Moulvi Maqbool Hussain
20. Md. Kalam @ Kalam S/o Late Moulvi Maqbool Hussain
21. Akmal S/o Late Moulvi Maqbool Hussain All resident of village -
Basantpur, P.S. - Amdabad, District - Katihar.
22. Abdul Basir S/o Late Junab Ali
23. Md. Samir S/o Late Junab Ali
24. Muzaffar S/o Late Junab Ali
25. Md. Irfan S/o Late Junab Ali
26. Md. Sulaiman S/o Late Haji Maqsood Ali
27. Abdul Hakim S/o Late Haji Maqsood Ali All 22 to 27 are resident of village
- Baidyanathpur, P.S. - Amdabad, District Katihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Katihar.
3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Manihari, District - Katihar.
4. The Block Development Officer, Amdabad, District - Katihar.
Patna High Court CWJC No.22148 of 2014 dt.03-04-2025
2/5
5. The Circle Officer. Amdabad, District - Katihar.
6. The Prabhari Padadhikari, Bhu Bandobast Parimap, Purnea now Katihar.
7. Chikku Singh @ Rohit Singh S/o Late Parduman Singh resident of village -
Guagachhi, P.S. Manihari, District - Katihar, At present residing at village -
Bullaghatti, P.S. - Amdabad, District - Katihar.
8. Ramanand Gupta S/o Late Baldev Sah resident of village - Kantakosh, P.S. -
Manihari, District - Katihar.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Md. Ataur Rahman, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Dhirendra Kumar, AC to AAG-6
For the Resp. No. 8 : Mrs. Rekha Prasad, Advocate
Ms. Anamika Priyadarshi, Advocate
Ms. Priyanka Kumari, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 03-04-2025
Heard Md. Ataur Rahman, learned counsel for the
petitioners, Mr. Dhirendra Kumar, learned counsel for the State
and Mrs. Rekha Prasad, learned counsel for the Respondent No.
8.
2. The present writ application has been filed for quashing
the order dated 08.01.2014 (Annexure-5) passed by the
Respondent No. 2 in Misc. Case No. P.133/12-13 and also direct
for production of order dated 14.05.1976 (as contained in
Annexure 7) passed by the respondent no. 6 in case no. 1 of
1974 (Parduman Singh vs. Nasir and Others) and thereafter to
quash it. Further prayed for direction to quash the order dated
21.08.86
(as contained in Annexure-8) passed by the District
Judge, Katihar in Special Title Appeal No. 1 of 1976.
Patna High Court CWJC No.22148 of 2014 dt.03-04-2025
3. Learned counsel for the private respondent has taken a
preliminary objection with regard to maintainability of the
present writ petition and submits that it appears from the
pleading that pursuant to the order dated 12.02.2014 passed in
MJC No. 2058 of 2013, the petitioners have been given liberty
to challenge the order dated 08.01.2014 and two other orders
upon which the said order dated 08.01.2014 has been passed by
the Collector. On going through the said Collector's order, it
appears to have been passed in two previous orders dated
14.05.1976 passed by the Charge Officer and order dated
21.08.1986 passed by the learned District Judge, Katihar
wherein the said order dated 14.05.1976 was made impugned.
4. Learned counsel for the private respondent further
submits that since the matter enumerates from entry of the
name of the petitioners during Revisional Survey, 1958 on
subsequent proceeding before the Charge Officer and learned
District Judge were guided by the Bihar Tenancy Act and the
petitioners had already availed the remedy which was available
under Section 109(A) (2) by the petitioners before the District
Judge concerned. And now the remedy appears to have been
available to the petitioners under Section 109(A) (3) of the B.T.
Act before the Hon'ble Court. Learned counsel for the
Patna High Court CWJC No.22148 of 2014 dt.03-04-2025
respondents has produced a provision as contained in Section
109(A) (3) which is quoted hereinbelow:-
"109A. Appeals from decisions of Revenue-
officers :-
(1) The State Government shall appoint]1 one
or more persons to be a Special Judge for the
purpose of hearing appeals from the decisions
of Revenue Officers under Sections 105 to 108
(both inclusive).
(2) An appeal shall lie to the Special Judge from
the decisions of a Revenue Officer under
sections 105 to 108-A (both inclusive), and the
provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure (14 of
1882)]2 relating to appeals shall; as nearly as
may be, apply to all such appeals.
(3 ) Subject to the provisions of Chapter XLII]3
of the Code of Civil Procedure (14 of 1882) an
appeal shall lie to High Court from the decision
of Special Judge in any case under this Section
(not being a decision settling a rent) as if he
were a Court subordinate to the High Court
within the meaning of the first section of that
Chapter:
Provided that, if in a second appeal the High
Court alters the decision of the Special Judge in
respect of any of the particulars with reference
to which the rent of any tenure or holding has
been settled the Court may settle a new rent for
the tenure or holding but in so doing shall be
guided by the rents of the other tenures or
holdings of the same class comprised in the
Patna High Court CWJC No.22148 of 2014 dt.03-04-2025
same record as acertained under Section 102 or
settled under Section 105 or Section 108."
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the materials available on record and it appears from the
provisions contained in Section 109 of the Bihar Tenancy Act
1885, the petitioners have remedy to file a second appeal and
challenge the order dated 21.08.1986 passed by the District
Judge who under Section 109 (A)(2) is empowered to hear the
matter of the decision of the Revenue Officer under Section 105
to 108 and the provision of the Code of Civil Procedure relating
to appeal shall be nearly as may be applied of such appeals.
6. In view of the aforesaid, this writ petition is not
maintainable and the petitioners may file a second appeal before
the High Court, if so advised.
7. Accordingly, this writ application stands dismissed.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
priyanka/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 08.04.2025
Transmission Date N/A
