Patna High Court
Bibhuti Nath Jha vs The State Of Bihar on 11 February, 2025
Author: Anshuman
Bench: Anshuman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1925 of 2025
======================================================
Bibhuti Nath Jha Son of Late Suryakant Jha, Resident of Village- Madhupur,
P.S.- Kamtaul, District - Darbhanga.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue
and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Collector, Darbhanga.
3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Sadar Darbhanga.
4. The Anchal Adhikari, Singhwara, District- Darbhanga.
5. The Chairman, Bihar Land Tribunal, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Kinkar Kumar, SC-9
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 11-02-2025
Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and
Learned Counsel for the State.
2. The present writ petition has been filed by the
petitioner for the following reliefs:
"(i) For quashing the Order
dated 16/01/2024 passed by the Chairman of
the Bihar Land Tribunal Patna (Respondent
No. 5) in B.L.T Case No. 275 of 2023.
(ii) For also quashing the
Order dated 23/8/2022 passed by
Respondent No. 2, the Collector, Darbhanga
Bhoodan Case No. 72 of 2010-11 by which
Patna High Court CWJC No.1925 of 2025 dt.11-02-2025
2/8
the learned Collector has been pleased to
direct the concerned authorities to take steps
for cancellation of Parcha issued in favour
of the petitioner by the Bhoodan Yagna
Committee, holding the land in question to
be a Public land.
(iii) For directing the
Respondent authorities to protect the land in
question settled in favour of the petitioner
under the Bhoodan Yagna Act as directed by
the Hon'ble Court in a previous Writ petition
bearing C.W.J.C No. 10978 of 2009 Vide
order dated 05/10/2009.
(iv) For any other relief or
reliefs for which the petitioner may be found
entitled in the facts and circumstances of the
case."
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits
that the land-in-question was donated by one Amar Prasad
Singh son of Babu Bishun Prasad Singh through Dan Patra
dated 29.12.1953. He submits that the said Dan Patra was
confirmed by the Bhoodan Yagna Committee vide Confirmation
Case No.381/A of the year 1957-58 and final order of
confirmation was passed on 24.01.1958. Counsel submits that
the petitioner is a landless person and 33 decimals of donated
land was settled along with other persons. The deed of
settlement dated 10.07.1994 was issued in favour of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.1925 of 2025 dt.11-02-2025
3/8
petitioner. Counsel further submits that the settlement of land in
favour of the petitioner was confirmed by Bhoodan Yagna
Committee and the Anchal Adhikari, Singhwara, had fix the rent
for the land-in-question settled in favour of the petitioner and
granted rent receipt only one time in the year 1994, but
thereafter rent receipt was not granted. Since 1995 onward, the
petitioner has made several attempt before the superior officers
as well as Additional Collector but no action was taken and,
therefore, the petitioner had moved before this Court in CWJC
No.10978 of 2009 seeking a direction upon the respondent to
protect the land in question which was settled to the petitioner
by Bhoodan Yagna Committee. Counsel submits that in the
said writ petition vide order dated 05.10.2009 a direction was
made to the Collector-cum-Revenue Officer under Section 14A
of the Act. Counsel submits that in compliance of the said order
the petitioner moved before the Collector and filed a petition
with relevant documents on 05.12.2009. His case was
registered as case No.72 of 2010-11. Counsel submits that after
long gap of about twelve years, final order was passed on
23.08.2022
and the said order is completely illegal, arbitrary and
without jurisdiction. Learned Counsel further submits that the
Collector has crossed the jurisdiction so vested in him and he
Patna High Court CWJC No.1925 of 2025 dt.11-02-2025
has passed order that the said Dan Patra is illegally and
ineffective and directed the Bhoodan authorities to withdraw
the Parcha. Learned Counsel further submits that the said order
is completely in gross violation of the law laid down as the
Collector has directed to vacate the land initiating a proceeding
under the Bihar Land Encroachment Act. Counsel for the
petitioner submits that being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the
order dated 23.08.2022 passed by the Collector, the petitioner
preferred a case before the Bihar Land Tribunal bearing B.L.T.
Case No.275 of 2023. In the said B.L.T. case, final order has
been passed on 16.01.2024 by which the claim of the petitioner
was rejected and the order passed by the Collector dated
23.08.2022 has been affirmed and B.L.T. Case of the petitioner
has been dismissed. Counsel for the petitioner submits that after
passing final order in B.L.T. the only remedy left with the
petitioner is filing the writ petition before this Court. He
submits that the order of the Collector is absolutely illegal. He
submits that when Bhoodan Yagna Committee has donated land
in his favour which was confirmed, therefore, in that case he has
no power to interfere in the same and his order of cancellation
of the said settlement as well as the donation of the year 1958
saying that it is illegal is absolutely violative to law.
Patna High Court CWJC No.1925 of 2025 dt.11-02-2025
4. Learned Counsel for the State, on the other
hand, submits that order passed by the B.L.T. has been made
completely in accordance with law. He submits that Section 22
of the Bhoodan Yagna Act, 1954 clearly deals a situation as to
how ejectment of a person in unlawful possession of land has to
be made. He submits that in the proviso of Section 2, it has
been stated that the ejectment under Section 22 of the Act shall
be made in those cases also where Section 11 of the Act process
has been crossed as like that of the case of the present petitioner.
5. In response thereof, Counsel for the petitioner
submits that the provisions laid down in Section 22 of the Act is
an older one; whereas Section 14A of the Act has been inserted
later on, in the year 1965 in which protection has been granted
for the Bhoodan land from ejectment and Collector has to grant
protection of the Bhoodan land which was allotted to the
petitioner, but instead thereof granting protection, he had
passed order for ejectment against the petitioner.
6. Learned Counsel for the State also submits
that in this circumstance the petitioner has only remedy laid
down under Section 17(4) of the Act to institute a Civil Suit
having jurisdiction to set aside the order.
7. In response thereof, Counsel for the petitioner
Patna High Court CWJC No.1925 of 2025 dt.11-02-2025
submits that the order which has been passed by the Collector
under Section 14A has been made in gross violation of law and
is basically illegal and arbitrary order which ought to be set
aside.
8. Upon hearing the parties, the question which is
important for just decision of this case is that whether the
Collector at the time of passing order on application under
Section 14A of the Bhoodan Yagna Act, 1954 can exercise his
power so vested in him by virtue of Section 22 of the Said Act
or not and the second question which is important for just
decision of this Court is that in the present case what remedy is
available to the petitioner at present.
9. This Court upon consideration of the pleadings
and hearing the arguments of the parties as well as considering
the basic jurisprudence of interpretation of statute that any
statue has been framed and collection of different sections, this
Court is of the firm view that both power vested in the Revenue
Officer under the Act, one power that is inserted by amendment
to grant protection to the guarantee of Bhoodan land from
ejectment and second is the power of ejectment of person in
unlawful possession of land. The Review Officer has been
granted both powers under the law to exercise power in
Patna High Court CWJC No.1925 of 2025 dt.11-02-2025
consonance with Sections 14A and 22 of the Act. This Court is
of the view that when any quasi judicial authority, at the time of
hearing an application for granting protection, has definite
power for ejectment of any person, if found in unlawful
possession of the land as both the powers have been vested in
the Revenue Authority, by the law maker and the same authority
has to exercise the power of protection and the ejectment both.
It is the actual exercise of a person who is exhausting his
judicial mind in any relevant case. Here in the present case, this
Court is of the view that though the Collector was exercising
his power under Section 14A for which application has been
filed, but he found during exercise of power under Section 14A
that the petitioner is basically in unlawful possession of the land
and, therefore, he has passed order under Section 22 is not bad-
in-law in view of this Court.
10. The petitioner has moved before the B.L.T.
and B.L.T. has affirmed the order passed by the Collector, the
B.L.T. has assigned the reasons as to why the B.L.T. has not
entering into the decision passed by the Collector, but Section
17(4) of the Act provides special power to the person to move
before the Civil Court and, therefore, this Court is not
entertaining the writ petition.
Patna High Court CWJC No.1925 of 2025 dt.11-02-2025
11. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed off
granting liberty to the petitioner to file civil suit within six
months from today if he has been so advised.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Mkr./-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 14.02.2025
Transmission Date NA
