[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Patna High Court
Gautam Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 26 February, 2026
Author: Sudhir Singh
Bench: Sudhir Singh, Rajesh Kumar Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.109 of 2024
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16329 of 2023
======================================================
1. Gautam Kumar Son of Late Maya Shankar Jha Resident of village
Balbhadrapur, P.S.- Laheriasarai District- Darbhanga.
2. Rampati Jha, Son of Late Kanhaiya Jha Resident of village Balbhadrapur,
P.S.- Laheriasarai District- Darbhanga.
3. Gauri Shankar Jha, Son of Late Ramdeo Jha Resident of village
Balbhadrapur, P.S.- Laheriasarai District- Darbhanga.
4. Mohan Jha @ Mohan Kumar Jha, Son of Late Ramdeo Jha Resident of
village Balbhadrapur, P.S.- Laheriasarai District- Darbhanga.
5. Umesh Jha, Son of Late Sukhdeo Jha Resident of village Balbhadrapur, P.S.-
Laheriasarai District- Darbhanga.
6. Suresh Jha @ Suresh Kumar Jha, Son of Late Sukhdeo Jha Resident of
village Balbhadrapur, P.S.- Laheriasarai District- Darbhanga.
7. Raman Kumar Jha, Son of Late Anirudh Jha Resident of village
Balbhadrapur, P.S.- Laheriasarai District- Darbhanga.
8. Shiv Shankar Jha, Son of Late Sitaram Jha Resident of village Balbhadrapur,
P.S.- Laheriasarai District- Darbhanga.
9. Rama Shankar Jha, Son of Late Achak Narayan Jha Resident of village
Balbhadrapur, P.S.- Laheriasarai District- Darbhanga.
10. Prem Shankar Jha, Son of Late Achak Narayan Jha Resident of village
Balbhadrapur, P.S.- Laheriasarai District- Darbhanga.
11. Bala Shankar Jha, Son of Late Mishri Lal Jha Resident of village
Balbhadrapur, P.S.- Laheriasarai District- Darbhanga.
12. Uday Shankar Jha, Son of Late Achak Narayan Jha Resident of village
Balbhadrapur, P.S.- Laheriasarai District- Darbhanga.
13. Amarjee Jha, Son of Late Asharfi Lal Jha Resident of village Balbhadrapur,
P.S.- Laheriasarai District- Darbhanga.
14. Dinesh Jha, Son of Late Hardeo Narayan Jha Resident of village
Balbhadrapur, P.S.- Laheriasarai District- Darbhanga.
... ... Appellants
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate/ Collector, Darbhanga.
2. The Commissioner, Darbhanga.
3. The Additional Collector, Darbhanga.
4. Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Darbhanga.
5. The Sub Divisional Officer, Darbhanga.
6. The Circle Officer, Bahadurpur Block, Darbhanga.
7. Circle Inspector, Bahadurpur Block, Darbhanga.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.109 of 2024 dt.26-02-2026
2/9
8. Revenue Karmachari, Bahadurpur Block, Darbhanga.
9. Anchal Amin, Bahadurpur Block, Darbhanga.
10. Md. Kamruddin, son of Late Md. Abdul Ghani Resident of village- Shahganj
Benta, P.O. BMC., P.S. Laheriasarai, District-Darbhanga.
11. Ibene Hassan @ Baban Mian, Resident of Shahganj New Balbhadrapur,
Lakheriasarai, Darbhanga.
12. Jata Shanker Jha, Son of Late Vishnu Deo Jha, Resident of village-
Balbhadrapur, P.S. Leheriasarai, District- Darbhanga.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellants : Mr. Kamal Nayan Choubey, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Ambuj Nayan Chaubey, Advocate
Mr. Ashok Kumar Garg, Advocate
Mr. Dineshwar Pandey, Advocate
Ms. Ritu Priyadarshani, Advocate
Ms. Manju Sharma, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. Addl. Advocate General-12
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH)
Date : 26-02-2026
Heard learned counsel for the appellants and
learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The present intra court appeal is directed against
the order dated 05.01.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge
in C.W.J.C. No. 16329 of 2023, whereby the writ petition
preferred by the appellants came to be disposed of with liberty
to avail appropriate remedy before the competent Civil Court.
3. The facts giving rise to the present appeal, in
brief, are that pursuant to the order dated 05.09.2022 passed in
CWJC No. 18397 of 2018, the District Magistrate was directed
Patna High Court L.P.A No.109 of 2024 dt.26-02-2026
to dispose of the representation by a reasoned order. In
compliance thereof, the Collector passed order dated 20.06.2023
holding that the land in question belonged to the State of Bihar
and recommending cancellation of the Jamabandi created in
favour of the appellants. The appellants contend that the land in
question was recorded as Gairmajarua Khas and Bakastha
under the possession of their ancestors, and that upon vesting
they were entitled to be treated as settled raiyats. Aggrieved by
the Collector's order, they preferred CWJC No. 16329 of 2023,
which came to be disposed of by the learned Single Judge
relegating them to the Civil Court.
4. The learned Writ Court, after hearing the parties,
passed the following orders:
"7. After hearing the parties and
upon perusal of the order under challenge, it
transpires to this Court that the order passed by the
Collector is in three parts. In the first part, it has
been decided by the Collector that in the present
facts and circumstances, the question of title is
involved for which only competent authority is the
civil court, and therefore, in the opinion of the
Court, the petitioners shall be at liberty to file a title
suit for declaration of the title in their favour.
8. The second part is the principles of
law decided and in the opinion of the Court, the said
principle is also in favour of the petitioners whereas
in the third part, it is mere recommendation to
initiate the proceedings for cancellation of
Patna High Court L.P.A No.109 of 2024 dt.26-02-2026
Jamabandi in accordance with law. This part of the
order is absolutely lawful and there is no need of
any interference in the opinion of the Court.
9. As such, this writ petition is
disposed of directing the petitioners to avail remedy
before the competent civil court. So far as the
question of cancellation of Jamabandi is concerned,
petitioners shall be at liberty to file any appropriate
petition before the competent civil court to get such
relief or to contest the case as and when the
occasion shall arise upon receiving notice in the
Jamabandi cancellation proceeding.
10. With the aforesaid direction, the
present writ application is hereby disposed of."
5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
the condition precedent for invoking power under Section 9 of
the Bihar Mutation Act has not been satisfied in the present
case. It is further submitted that the authorities under the Act are
creatures of statute and are tribunals of limited jurisdiction,
obliged to act strictly within the four corners of the statute, and
any action taken beyond the statutory framework is void ab
initio.
6. Learned counsel further submits that a long-
standing jamabandi cannot be cancelled in a summary
proceeding by a Revenue Officer. In support of the said
submission, reliance has been placed upon the judgments of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Harendranath Tiwari vs. State of
Patna High Court L.P.A No.109 of 2024 dt.26-02-2026
Bihar, reported in 1987 Supp SCC 56; Prithvi Nath Singh vs.
Suraj Ahir, reported in AIR 1963 SC 1041; and further upon the
judgment of this Court in Arun Kumar Goenka vs. State of
Bihar & Ors., reported in 2023 (5) BLJ 321.
7. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for
the appellants that the land in question stood recorded as
"Gairmajarua Khas" and was "Bakastha" land under actual
physical possession of the ancestors of the appellants on the date
of vesting and, therefore, they are entitled to be treated as settled
raiyats under the State. It is further submitted that the learned
Single Judge ought to have adjudicated the matter on merits
instead of relegating them to the Civil Court.
8. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents
submits that once the learned Single Judge, after considering the
nature of the dispute, relegated the appellants to avail remedy
before the competent Civil Court, it cannot now be contended
that the order is without merit. The writ court has exercised its
jurisdiction in accordance with settled principles that disputed
questions of title and possession are not amenable to
adjudication under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
9. It is submitted that granting liberty to approach
the Civil Court does not amount to abdication of jurisdiction,
Patna High Court L.P.A No.109 of 2024 dt.26-02-2026
therefore, the impugned order does not suffer from any illegality
warranting interference in appeal.
10. The limited issue that arises for consideration
before this Court is whether, in the facts and circumstances of
the present case, the order dated 05.01.2024 passed by the
learned Single Judge, whereby the appellants have been
relegated to avail remedy before the competent Civil Court,
suffers from any illegality, jurisdictional error or perversity so as
to warrant interference in exercise of its intra court appellate
jurisdiction.
11. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at
length and have carefully perused the order dated 05.01.2024
passed by the learned Single Judge, as also the materials
brought on record.
12. At the outset, it is evident that the learned
Single Judge has not dismissed the writ petition cursorily. The
order reflects a structured and reasoned analysis of the
Collector's order in three distinct compartments. In the first part,
the Collector recorded that the dispute essentially involves
determination of title. The learned Single Judge concurred with
this finding and observed that declaration of title falls
exclusively within the domain of the competent Civil Court.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.109 of 2024 dt.26-02-2026
This approach is firmly rooted in settled principles governing
writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
13. In the second part, the learned Single Judge
examined the legal principles referred to in the Collector's order
and expressly observed that the said principles were in favour of
the petitioners. This clearly demonstrates that the learned Single
Judge applied his judicial mind and did not mechanically affirm
the administrative order.
14. In the third part, the Collector had merely
recommended initiation of proceedings for cancellation of
jamabandi in accordance with law. The learned Single Judge
observed that such recommendation, being subject to statutory
procedure and compliance with principles of natural justice, did
not warrant interference at that stage. Significantly, liberty was
granted to the petitioners to challenge such proceedings before
the competent Civil Court or to contest the same upon receipt of
notice. Thus, the rights of the appellants were adequately
safeguarded.
15. We are unable to accept the submission of the
appellants that the learned Single Judge abdicated jurisdiction. It
is trite that writ courts do not ordinarily adjudicate disputed
questions of title requiring examination of evidence, historical
Patna High Court L.P.A No.109 of 2024 dt.26-02-2026
land records and possession. Relegation to the Civil Court in
such circumstances is not refusal to exercise jurisdiction but a
judicious exercise of discretion.
16. In the present case, the learned Single Judge has
not decided the question of title against the appellants; rather,
the parties have been relegated to the competent Civil Court for
adjudication of such rights. This course of action is consistent
with the principles laid down by the Supreme Court.
17. The reliance placed by the appellants on
Harendranath Tiwari, Prithvi Nath Singh, and Arun Kumar
Goenka (supra) does not advance their case. The principle that
mutation entries do not confer title and that title disputes are to
be adjudicated by Civil Courts is not in dispute. In fact, the
learned Single Judge has adopted a course consistent with that
very principle by directing the parties to approach the Civil
Court. The learned Single Judge has not upheld any summary
cancellation; rather, it has been clarified that proceedings, if
initiated, must be in accordance with law and subject to
challenge before the appropriate forum.
18. We are also mindful that in intra-Court
appellate jurisdiction, interference is limited. Unless the order
under appeal suffers from patent illegality, perversity or
Patna High Court L.P.A No.109 of 2024 dt.26-02-2026
jurisdictional error, the appellate court would be slow to
substitute its discretion for that of the learned Single Judge.
19. In the facts of the present case, we find that the
learned Single Judge has exercised jurisdiction judiciously, has
analysed the Collector's order in a structured manner, and has
safeguarded the rights of the appellants by granting liberty to
approach the Civil Court. No manifest error or perversity is
made out.
20. Accordingly, the order dated 05.01.2024 passed
by the learned Single Judge does not call for interference. The
same is hereby affirmed.
21. The present intra court appeal, therefore, stands
dismissed.
22. Pending application(s), if any, shall stands
disposed of.
(Sudhir Singh, J.)
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J.)
Gaurav Kumar/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N.A.
Uploading Date 10.03.2026
Transmission Date N.A.
