Patna High Court
Md. Rizwan Alam @ Md. Rizwan And Ors vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 10 July, 2025
Author: Anshuman
Bench: Anshuman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1849 of 2019
======================================================
1. Md. Rizwan Alam @ Md. Rizwan and Ors Son of late Md. Rayeesuddin R/o
Vill- Kujouri, P.S. Alamnagar, Distt. Madhepura,
2. Md. Rehan Alam Son of late Md. Rayeesuddin R/o Vill- Kujouri, P.S.
Alamnagar, Distt. Madhepura,
3. Md. Rabban Alam@ Md. Rabban Son of Md. Rayeesuddin R/o Vill-
Kujouri, P.S. Alamnagar, Distt. Madhepura,
4. Md. Ibran Alam@ Imran Alam son of late Md. Rayeesuddin R/o Vill-
Kujouri, P.S. Alamnagar, Distt. Madhepura, presently residing at Village-
Shahidganj, P.S. and District Purnea
5. Md. Rayeesh@ Rayeesh Hassan Son of late Azizur Rahman Resident of
Village and Post Office- Shahidganj, P.S. Bhawanipur, Distt. Purnea
6. Md. Suleman Son of late Aziuzur Rahman Resident of Village and Post
Office- Shahidganj, P.S. Bhawanipur, Distt. Purnea
7. Md. Irfan Son of late Azizur Rahman Resident of Village and Post Office-
Shahidganj, P.S. Bhawanipur, Distt. Purnea
8. Md. Badi@ Lurka Son of late Azizur Rahman Resident of Village and Post
Office- Shahidganj, P.S. Bhawanipur, Distt. Purnea
9. Md. Anwar Son of late Md. Abdul Gani Resident of Village and Post Office-
Shahidganj, P.S. Bhawanipur, Distt. Purnea
10. Md. Umar@ Umar Faruque Son of late Md. Abdul Gani Resident of Village
and Post Office- Shahidganj, P.S. Bhawanipur, Distt. Purnea
11. Md. Taha Son of late Md. Usman Gani Resident of Village- Kujouri,
P.S.Alamnagar, Distt. Madhepura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar and Ors through Principal Secretary Revenue and Land
Reforms, Department, Bihar, Patna
2. The Director, Land and Revenue Department, Bihar, Patna
3. The District Magistrate, Purnea
4. The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Dhamdha, Distt. Purnea
5. Md. Nijamuddin Son of late Kamruddin Resident of Village- Chikni, P.S.
Barhara Kothi, Distt. Purnea
6. Md. Azimuddin Son of late Kamruddin Resident of Village- Chikni, P.S.
Barhara Kothi, Distt. Purnea
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, Adv.
Mr. Manoj Kr. Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, GP14
Mr. Binay Kumar Sinha, Adv.
Patna High Court CWJC No.1849 of 2019 dt.10-07-2025
2/5
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 10-07-2025
Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioners Learned
Counsel for the State and Learned Counsel for the private
respondents.
2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the
present writ petition has been filed with the following reliefs:-
(i) For issuance of writ in the nature of
certiorari for quashing the order dated 27.06.2018
passed by the Chairman, Bihar Land Tribunal,
Patna in B.L.T. Case No. 1268 of 2015 whereby
was allowed and impugned order passed by the
Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Dhamdaha,
Purnea dated 11.4.2015 in Case No. 28 of 2013-14
has been set aside and the matter has been remitted
back to the Deputy Collector Land Reforms for
proceeding afresh in accordance with law.
(ii) For issuance of writ in the nature of
Mandamus direction to Respondents to restore the
order dated 11.4.2015 passed by Deputy Collector,
of 2013-14 whereby he has dismissed the case filed
(E) of B.T. Act.
3. Counsel for the petitioners further submits that the
order passed by the Bihar Land Tribunal, Patna is absolutely
Patna High Court CWJC No.1849 of 2019 dt.10-07-2025
illegal and without any basis. He further submits that the order
passed by the D.C.L.R. is completely in accordance with law
and need no inteference.
4. Counsel for the State on the other hand submits that
the said writ petition is not maintainable and the reason has
already been mentioned in paragraph 5 of the B.L.T. order. He
further submits that B.L.T. has only remanded back the matter to
decide the same by the D.C.L.R. afresh in the light of Full
Bench of this Court in case of Dhanji Singh Vs. State of Bihar
& Ors. reported in 1979 P.L.J.R. 711. Therefore, he submits
that the order passed by the B.L.T. is a reasoned and speaking
order as well as in accordance with law and need no
interference.
5. Counsel for the private respondents submits that the
petitioners are under raiyat and order passed by the B.L.T.,
Patna, need no interference.
6. After hearing the parties and upon perusal of the
record, it is necessary to observe the reasoning assigned by the
Bihar Land Tribunal, Patna whose paragraphs 5, 6 and 7 are
relevant which states as follows:-
5. After considering the submissions and
perusal of the materials on record, it is evident that
on the petition filed by the petitioner for the reliefs
Patna High Court CWJC No.1849 of 2019 dt.10-07-2025
under Section 48(E) B.T. Act, the D.C.L.R. issued
notice to the opposite parties who appeared in the
case thereafter. The fact has also been accepted by
the opposite parties in their counter affidavit in
paragraph 11 that the order has been passed by the
D.C.L.R. after hearing the parties and considering
the evidence produced by them. From the perusal
of the impugned order also it transpires that the
order has been passed by the D.C.L.R. mainly on
the ground that the petitioners have failed to
substantiate their claim of bataidari by cogent
evidence. However the law in this regard has been
laid down by the full bench of Hon'ble Patna High
Court in Dhanji Singh versus the State of Bihar &
Ors 1979 P.L.J.R. 711 where their lordships have
concluded in identical fact the procedure adopted
by the authority below in dismissing the case is not
sanctioned by law.
6. This tribunal therefore holds that the
impugned order passed by the D.C.L.R. dismissing
the case filed by the petitioner under Section 48(E)
B.T. Act cannot be legally sustained.
7. In result, this application is allowed
and the impugned order passed by the D.C.L.R.
dated 11.04.2015 in Case No. 28/2013-14 is hereby
set aside. The matter is remitted back to the
D.C.L.R. for proceeding afresh in accordance with
law/rule(s).
7. After going through the reasoning, it transpires to
Patna High Court CWJC No.1849 of 2019 dt.10-07-2025
this Court that the finding of the BLT is completely in
accordance with the Full Bench decision and the matter has not
been decided on merit, rather illegality which has been done by
the D.C.L.R. has been acknowledged and matter has been
remanded back. It is due to this reason, this Court finds that
there is no need of interference in the order dated 27.06.2018
passed by the Chairman, Bihar Land Tribunal, Patna in B.L.T.
Case No. 1268 of 2015, and hence, the present writ petition is
hereby dismissed.
8. With the aforesaid directions and observations, the
present writ application stands dismissed.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Prakashmani/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date
Transmission Date N/A
