[Cites 8, Cited by 0]
Patna High Court
Gita Mandal vs The State Of Bihar on 20 January, 2026
Author: Mohit Kumar Shah
Bench: Mohit Kumar Shah
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15426 of 2025
======================================================
1. Gita Mandal Son of Mahaveer Mandal, Resident of Village Harla, Kundri
Son Kurha Harla, P.O.-Amarath, Block - Jamui, P.S. - Jamui, District -
Jamui, Bihar, being in the capacity of the present Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat
Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block-Jamui, District-Jamui.
2. Jamuna Thakur, S/o Devi Thakur, R/o Village- Sankurha (Baharayan), P.S.-
Jamui, District- Jamui being in the Capacity of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat
Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block - Jamui, District- Jamui.
3. Vinita Devi, W/o Sakindra Kumar, R/o Village-Sitarampur, P.S- Jamui
District- Jamui, being in the capacity of ward Panch, ward no.-03, Gram
Panchayat Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block- Jamui, District-Jamui.
4. Chanda Devi, W/o Mukesh Singh, R/o Village Ganesh nawada, P.S- Jamui,
Dist- Jamui, being in the capacity of Ward Panch, ward no.08 Gram
panchayat Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block Jamui, Distirct- Jamui.
5. Pramila Devi, W/o Nageshwar Mandal, R/o Village Harla, P.S-Jamui,
District- Jamui, being in the capacity of Ward Panch, ward no.-13 Block-
Jamui, District-Jamui.
6. Manju Devi, W/o Naresh Mandal, Village-Harla, P.S- Jamui, Dist- Jamui,
being in the capacity of ward Panch, ward No.-14 Gram panchayat Raj
Kundri, Sankurha Block-Jamui, Dist- Jamui.
7. Gajo Manjh, S/o Late Gopal Manjhi, Resident of Village Kharsari, P.S-
Jamui, District- Jamui being in the capacity of Ward Member, ward no.02,
Gram Panchayat Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block- Jamui, District - Jamui.
8. Ajay Pawan, S/o Ruso Paswan, R/o Village- Ganesh Nawada, P.S-Jamui,
District- Jamui, being in the capacity of Ward Member, ward no.08 Gram
Panchayat Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block-Jamui, District - Jamui.
9. Manju Devi, W/o Shyam Ravidas, Village- Kundri P.S- Jamui, District-
Jamui, being in the Capacity of Ward Member, Ward No.09 Gram Panchayat
Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block - Jamui, District - Jamui.
10. Ritu Devi, W/o-Mannu Singh, R/o-Village - Kundri, P.S- Jamui, District-
Jamui being in the capacity of Ward Member Ward no.10, Gram Panchayat
Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block-Jamui, District-Jamui.
11. Bibha Devi, W/o Pankaj Ram, R/o Village- Sankurha (Baharain) P.S- Jamui,
Dist- Jamui, being in the capacity of Ward Member, Ward no.11, Gram
Panchayat Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block-Jamui, Dist- Jamui.
12. Ganita Devi, W/o Ramwadan Paswan, R/o Village-Harla, P.S-Jamui, District
Jamui, being in the capacity of Ward Member, Ward no.13, Gram Panchayat
Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block-Jamui, District - Jamui.
13. Darogi Manjhi, S/o Yamuna Manjhi, R/o Village- Mahugay, P.S-Jamui,
District Jamui, being in the capacity of Ward Member, Ward no.15, Gram
Panchayat Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block-Jamui, District - Jamui.
14. Bhagirath Tanti, S/o Ram Chandra Tanti, R/o Village - Kharsari, P.S. -
Jamui, District - Jamui, being in the capacity of Ward Member, Ward no. 03,
Gram Panchayat Raj Kundri Sankurha, Block-Jamui, District - Jamui.
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
2/13
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Government of
Bihar, Patna.
3. The District Magistrate-cum- Collector, District-Jamui.
4. The District Panchayat Officer, District- Jamui.
5. The Sub Divisional Officer, Jamui, District- Jamui.
6. The Block Development Officer, Block- Jamui, District- Jamui.
7. The Block Panchayati Raj Officer, Block-Jamui, District-Jamui.
8. The Circle Officer, Jamui, District- Jamui.
9. The Executive Engineer, Building Division, District-Jamui.
10. Baijnath Nirman India Pvt. Ltd., Work Agency, Karyapalak Abhiyanta
Bhawan, Division, Jamui.
11. The Halka Karamchari, Kundri Sankurha Panchayat, Block and District-
Jamui.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Y.V Giri, Sr. Advocate
Ms.Shrishti Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Standing Counsel (11)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 20-01-2026
The writ petition has been filed in the nature of Public
Interest Litigation by the petitioners seeking for the following
reliefs:-
"To issue an appropriate writ, order, direction in the
nature of certiorari for quashing letter no. 719 dated
02.07.2024
issued by the District Magistrate, Jamui to
the Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayati Raj
Department, Government of Bihar, wherein land at
Mauza-Kundri - Sankurha, Harla, Thana no. 244,
Khata no. 333, Khesra no. 1173, comprising 50
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
decimals has been found sufficient for construction of
Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan in Gram Panchayat Raj
Kundri Sankurha of Block Jamui (Annexure-P/7, Pg.-
48).
(ii) To issue an appropriate writ, order,
direction in the nature of mandamus for commanding
the respondents to construct the Panchayat Sarkar
Bhawan on plot no. 2614, Khata No. 334, Mauza
Kundri-Sankurha-Harla, Anchal-Jamui, District-
Jamui.
(iii) To issue an appropriate writ, order,
direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the
SBD Tender no. 33/2024-2025 dated 17.02.2025 to
the extent of construction of Panchayat Sarkar
Bhawan in Kundri Sankurha Panchayat (Annexure-
P/8, Pg.-50).
(iv) To any other relief(s) for which the
petitioner appears to be found entitled to by the
Hon'ble Court."
2. The main grounds taken for seeking relief is that the
decision dated 02.07.2024 is contrary to the guidelines issued
by the State of Bihar as also is contrary to the resolution of the
Gram Sabha dated 02.10.2022. Further, ground has been taken
that the respondents have assumed uninhibited discretionary
powers beyond what has been conferred on them and the
decision has been taken without considering the objections
raised and the recommendation made and therefore, the action
of the respondent authority is arbitrary, illegal and violative of
Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
3. The case of the petitioners is that the department of
Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar, Patna issued Letter No.
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
8354 dated 30.08.2022, whereby and whereunder it has been
mandated that a minimum of 50 decimal of land is required
for making Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan, accordingly a piece of
land was selected and recommended, which is 41.323 and the
same is a part of 2.61 Acre of land and it is purely a
Government land. It is the further case that since the land
measuring 2.61 Acres and 50 Decimals is available for
consideration and even otherwise the recommended land is
sufficient for construction in terms of the Notification No. 281
dated 08.01.2024 issued by the Panchayati Raj Department,
the petitioners are entitled to get the relief. It is the further
case of the petitioners that at the instance of a former Member
of Bihar Legislative Council, the District Magistrate, Jamui
recommended another place for construction of Panchayat
Sarkar Bhawan to the Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayati
Raj Department, Government of Bihar and it was jointly
signed by District Panchayati Raj Officer, Jamui, the Deputy
Development Commissioner, Jamui and District Magistrate
Jamui. The case of the petitioners further is that a tender dated
17.02.2025 was floated for construction of Panchayat Sarkar
Bhawan in Kundri Sankurha Panchayat and the new location
of the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan construction work was not
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
mentioned anywhere in the notification. Several,
representations were filed by the petitioners and other
villagers, however, the authority did not pay any heed to the
same.
It is the further case of the petitioners that under
extraneous condition a unilateral decision has been taken to
construct the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan at new site despite the
fact that only 5 decimals of land is available at the new site
and the said land is not at the village headquarter. The
authorities are bent upon to proceed with the construction
work. It is the further case of the petitioners that Panchayat
Sarkar Bhawan is the nucleus of the working of the Panchayti
Raj System and constructing the same at the headquarter and
the centre will ensure convenience and accessibility to not just
the residents of the village but also to the adjoining villages
and therefore, the decision taken is against the will of the
people and the guidelines promulgated have been blatantly
flouted with the respondents assuming uninhibited
discretionary power and such action contravenes the principle
of good governance and it is a facet of public interest. Since,
the decision taken by the respondent authority is palpably
unreasonable and colorable exercise of power violative of
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
Article 14 of the Constitution of India, the same should be
interferred with.
4. Upon issuance of notice the respondent nos. 3 to 8
have filed the counter affidavit, wherein, it is stated as
follows:-
"8. That, the office of the Collector, Jamui,
vide letter no. 33 dated 09-01-2024 has earlier sent
proposal for construction of the Panchayat Sarkar
Bhawan, in Kundri-Sankurha, thana no. 244, khata
no. 334, plot no. 2164, area 41.323 dismil of land
which is 'GairmajaruaAam' land and its nature is
'Dagar'. In this regard, report has been received from
the Circle Officer, Jamui.
9. That, the Circle Officer, Jamui, has further
sent enquiry report vide letter no. 713 dated 25-06-
2024wherein it has been stated that as per the survey
map the land pertaining to mauja-Kundri-Sankurha,
Harla, thana no. 244, khata no. 333, plot no. 1173, is
1.05 acre. However, in the gairmajarua register, only
5 dismil of land has been entered in the said plot. The
Circle Officer, Jamui, has further stated in the said
report dated 25-06-2024 that as per the survey map,
there is 50 dismil of land in plot no. 1173, khata no.
333, mauja-Kundri-Sankurha, Harla, circle-Jamui,
which is suitable for the construction of the
Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan.
10. That, accordingly, the Collector, Jamui,
after considering the measurement report sent by the
Circle Officer, Jamui, has sent proposal vide letter
no. 719 dated 02-07-2024 to the Additional Secretary,
Panchayati Raj Department, Bihar, Patna, after
making necessary amendment, whereby the land
under plot no. 1173, khata no. 333, area-50 dismil,
mauja-Kundri-Sankurha, Harla, circle-Jamui, has
been found to suitable for the construction of the
Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan. Further, the said land is
free from being under GairmajaruaAam/land
ceiling/forest cover/water body or any other land
dispute.
11. That, the Block Panchayati Raj Officer,
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
Jamui, vide letter no. 256 dated 19-09-2025 has
sought current status from Circle Officer, Jamui, with
regard to the said land.
12. That, the Circle Officer, Jamui, vide letter
no. 1237 dated 10-10-2025 has submitted enquiry
report on the complaint of the writ petitioner, wherein
it has been clearly mentioned that the construction of
the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawanis being done in
Kundri-Sankurha Panchayat, which is the
headquarter village of the said Gram Panchayat,
which is in accordance with the departmental
guidelines issued vide letter no. 8354 dated 30-08-
2022 (Annexure-P/6) wherein it has been stated the
construction of the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan shall
be done generally in the headquarter village of the
Gram Panchayat and as per earlier guidelines
contained in Letter No 7593 dated 26.11.2019in case
of non-availability of land in the headquarter village
suitable land in other village of the Gram Panchayat
Area may be chosen by the concerned Collector.
13. That, the proposal sent by the Mukhiya,
Smt. Gita Mandal (petitioner), with regard to plot no.
2614 which is 'GairmajaruaAamDagar' land, has not
been found to be suitable. Thus, the office of the
District Panchayat Raj Officer, Jamui, vide letter no.
588 dated 29-05-2024 has sought fresh proposal
pursuant to which the aforesaid proposal report has
been submitted by the Circle Officer, Jamui.
14. That, the land proposed by the Mukhiya,
Smt. Gita Mandal, with regard to plot no. 2614 does
not lie under the headquarter of the Panchayat
whereas it comes under the village Harla. This is not
in accordance with the departmental guidelines dated
30-08-2022.
Further, the nature of the land is 'Dagar'
which is not in accordance with the said
departmental guidelines, wherein it has been
mentioned that the nature of the land chosen shall not
be 'pokhar', 'taalab', 'sadak', 'bhind', 'pind',
'aahar', 'paine', 'nala', 'jungle' etc.
15. That, in view of the aforesaid facts, it is
apparent that the proposal sent by the Collector,
Jamui to the Additional Secretary, Panchayati Raj
Department, Bihar, Patna, vide letter no. 713 dated
02-07-2024 is tenable in the eyes of law.
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
16. That, accordingly, S.B.D. Tender No.
33/2024-25 dated 17-02-2025 (Annexure-P/8 of the
writ petition) has been issued for the construction of
the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan under Kundri-
Sankurha Panchayat, by the Executive Engineer,
Building Construction Department.
17. That, it is humbly submitted that S.B.D.
Tender No. 33/2024-25 dated 17-02-2025, has
already been issued for the construction of the
Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan on the most suitable land.
Thus, claim made by the petitioner for the
construction of the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan, on
plot no. 2614, khata no. 334, mauja-Kundri-
Sankurha, Harla, circle-Jamui, is baseless,
misleading and fit to be rejected."
5. The rejoinder affidavit has been filed by the
petitioners to the counter affidavit filed by respondent nos. 3
to 8, paragraphs no. 3 to 5 whereof are reproduced
hereinbelow:-
"3. That with regard to the statements made
in paras 12 & 14 of the counter affidavit under reply,
it is stated that the same are incorrect and denied. The
Panchayat Bhawan at Harla is in fact within The
village headquarter which is evident from checklist
prepared by the respondent authorities (Annexure-P/4,
relevant page 36 of the writ petition), wherein it has
been mentioned that the land is situated in the village
headquarter. Letter dated 10.10.2025 is merely an
unfounded post facto justification being advanced
after filing of the present writ petition.
4. That it is stated that it has come to the
knowledge of the petitioner that the land where the
Panchayat Bhawan is now being constructed has been
approved for construction of PACS Godown through
letter no. 1341 dated 09.10.2023. Therefore also, the
current land for construction is not appropriate for
Panchayat Bhawan.
5. That with regard to the statements made in
para 13 of the counter affidavit under reply, it is
submitted that the same is incorrect and denied. The
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
land is suitable for constructing the Panchayat
Bhawan as is evident from the checklist forming part
of the proposal at Annexure-P/3 at page 34 and
Annexure-P/4, relevant page 36 of the writ petition. It
has been specifically mentioned that even though the
land is described as Dagar, the breadth and width are
sufficient. Moreover, according to the checklist, the
said land is suitable and does not suffer from any
infirmity."
6. Mr. Y.V. Giri, learned Senior counsel for the
petitioners being assisted by Ms. Shrishti Singh, has placed
before us Annexure-P/2 and Annexure-P/7 and advanced the
argument that the decision taken to change the site is arbitrary
and some extraneous consideration was there for taking such a
decision.
7. However, learned counsel for the State has placed
reliance on Annexure-P/6 to the counter affidavit, wherein, it
is specifically stated that minimum 50 decimals of land is
required for construction of Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan and
further procedures have been laid down therein. Learned
counsel for the State has also submitted that in similar matter
a Division Bench of this Court in its judgment dated
19.09.2025 passed in CWJC No. 11302 of 2025 (Shiv
Shankar Singh Vs. The State of Bihar and Anr) has taken
note of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, which are
as follows:-
"(a) State of Himachal Pradesh and
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
Others vs. Himachal Pradesh Nizi Vyavsayik
Prishikshan Kendra Sangh, reported in (2011) 6
SCC 597 in which it is held that Courts are not
intended to and should not substitute their views in
the views of the Executive in policy matters;
(b) BALCO Employees' Union (Regd.)
vs. Union of India and Others, reported in (2002)
2 SCC 333 in which it is held that unless a policy
decision is arbitrary, mala fide or contrary to
statutory provisions, Courts cannot interfere;
(c) Narmada Bachao Andolan vs. Union
of India and Others, reported in (2000) 10 SCC
664 in which it is held that Courts should not
examine the wisdom or correctness of policy
choices."
8. After going through the averments taken in the writ
petition, counter affidavit and the rejoinder to the counter
affidavit, we find that in view of the notification issued by the
Panchayati Raj Department under Annexure-P/6 and since the
minimum land was not available as far as the earlier site is
concerned, which was chosen at the first instance for
construction of Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan, the present
decision has been taken, however, law is well settled that in
the policy matters of Government, the Court should not
interfere unless there is palpable illegality or malafideness and
the decision is against the public interest.
In the case of Directorate Of Film Festivals And Ors.
Vs. Gaurav Ashwin Jain And Ors. : 2007 SCC OnLine SC
500, in paragraph 14, it has been held as follows :
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
"14. The scope of judicial review of governmental
policy is now well defined. Courts do not and
cannot act as Appellate Authorities examining the
correctness, suitability and appropriateness of a
policy. Nor are courts Advisors to the executive on
matters of policy which the executive is entitled to
formulate. The scope of judicial review when
examining a policy of the government is to check
whether it violates the fundamental rights of the
citizens or is opposed to the provisions of the
Constitution, or opposed to any statutory
provision or manifestly arbitrary. Courts cannot
interfere with policy either on the ground that it is
erroneous or on the ground that a better, fairer or
wiser alternative is available. Legality of the
policy, and not the wisdom or soundness of the
policy, is the subject of judicial review."
In the case of Centre For Public Interest Litigation
And Another Vs. Union Of India And Others : (2000) 8
SCC 606, in para-21, it has been held as follows :
"21. ...........The duty of the court is thus to confine
itself to the question of legality. Its concern should
be:
(1) Whether a decision-making authority exceeded
its powers?
(2) committed an error of law;
(3) committed a breach of the rules of natural
justice,
(4) reached a decision which no reasonable
tribunal would have reached or,
(5) abused its powers.
Therefore, it is not for the court to determine
whether a particular policy or particular decision
taken in the fulfilment of that policy is fair......"
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
In the case of Parisons Agrotech (P) Ltd. and Ors.
Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors. : AIR 2015 SC 3335, in
para 12, it has been held as follows :
"12. No doubt, the writ court has adequate power
of judicial review in respect of such decisions.
However, once it is found that there is sufficient
material for taking a particular policy decision,
bringing it within the four corners of Article 14 of
the Constitution, power of judicial review would
not extend to determine the correctness of such a
policy decision or to indulge into the exercise of
finding out whether there could be more
appropriate or better alternatives. Once we find
that parameters of Article 14 are satisfied; there
was due application of mind in arriving at the
decision which is backed by cogent material; the
decision is not arbitrary or irrational and; it is
taken in public interest, the Court has to respect
such a decision of the Executive as the policy
making is the domain of the Executive and the
decision in question has passed the test of the
judicial review."
In the case of in State of Orissa and Ors. v. Gopinath
Dash and Ors. : (2005) 13 SCC 495, it has been held as
follows :
"5. While exercising the power of judicial review
of administrative action, the Court is not the
Appellate Authority and the Constitution does not
permit the Court to direct or advise the executive
in the matter of policy or to sermonise qua any
matter which under the Constitution lies within the
sphere of the legislature or the executive, provided
these authorities do not transgress their
Patna High Court CWJC No.15426 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026
constitutional limits or statutory power.
6. xx xxxx xxx
7. The policy decision must be left to the
Government as it alone can adopt which policy
should be adopted after considering all the
points from different angles. In the matter of
policy decisions or exercise of discretion by the
Government so long as the infringement of
fundamental right is not shown the courts will
have no occasion to interfere and the Court will
not and should not substitute its own judgment
for the judgment of the executive in such
matters. In assessing the propriety of a decision
of the Government the Court cannot interfere
even if a second view is possible from that of the
Government."
9. In view of such settled principle of law laid down by
the Hon'ble Supreme Court, we find no perversity or illegality
on the part of the Government in taking the decision, and we
are not inclined to interfere with the same.
10. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed.
11. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of.
(Sangam Kumar Sahoo, CJ)
ranjan/- (Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 22.01.2026
Transmission Date NA
