Patna High Court – Orders
Jirakhan Thakur @ Digvijay Thakur @ … vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 4 August, 2025
Author: Anshuman
Bench: Anshuman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16159 of 2018
======================================================
1.1. Shail Kumari Devi W/o late Jirakhan Thakur @ Digvijay Thakur @
Dirakhan Thakur, R/o Village - Gangauli, P.O. - Gangauli, P.S. - Simri,
District- Buxar.
1.2. Abhishek Bijay Thakur S/o Late Jirakhan Thakur @ Digvijay Thakur @
Dirakhan Thakur, R/o Village - Gangauli, P.O. - Gangauli, P.S. - Simri,
District- Buxar.
1.3. Ajit Thakur S/o Late Jirakhan Thakur @ Digvijay Thakur @ Dirakhan
Thakur, R/o Village - Gangauli, P.O. - Gangauli, P.S. - Simri, District-
Buxar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar and Ors
2. The Collector, Buxar, District- Buxar.
3. The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Dumraon, District- Buxar.
4.1. Nirmala Devi D/o Late Brahm Dutta Thakur, R/o Village - Chhata, P.s. -
Basdih, District- Ballia, Uttar Pradesh
5. Fateh Bahadur Thakur @ Bhuti Thakur, Son of Ambika Thakur, resident of
Village- Gangauli P.O.- Gangauli, P.S.- Simri, District- Buxar.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pandit Jee Pandey, Advocate
Mr. Ramendrapati Tripathy, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Raj Kishore Roy - GP-18
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
3 04-08-2025
I.A. No. 01 of 2025
Learned counsel for the writ petitioner submits that
during the pendency of the present writ petition, the sole
petitioner died, leaving behind his heirs and legal
representatives as mentioned in paragraph No. 4 of I.A. No. 01
of 2025. Counsel further submits that respondent No. 4 has also
died, leaving behind his heir and legal representative, his
Patna High Court CWJC No.16159 of 2018(3) dt.04-08-2025
2/6
daughter, whose name and details are mentioned in paragraph
No. 5 of I.A. No. 01 of 2025.
2. Learned counsel appearing for original respondent
No. 4 has no objection for the same.
3. Learned counsel for the State has also no objection
for the same.
4. Accordingly, the I.A. No. 01 of 2025 is hereby
allowed.
5. The Registry is directed to substitute the name of
the petitioner with his heirs and legal representatives as
mentioned in paragraph No. 4 of I.A. No. 01 of 2025. Similarly,
the name of respondent No. 4 shall be substituted with the name
mentioned in paragraph No. 5 of the said I.A. The Registry is
further directed to make necessary corrections in the hard copy
as well as in the soft copy of the cause title page during the
course of the day.
6. It transpires to this Court that the Vakalatnama has
been filed on behalf of the heirs of the writ petitioner, which is
annexed to the present Interlocutory Application and is hereby
directed to be accepted.
Re: CWJC No. 16159 of 2018
7. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
Patna High Court CWJC No.16159 of 2018(3) dt.04-08-2025
3/6
learned counsel for the State.
8. The present writ petition has been filed for setting
aside the order dated 05.02.2018 passed in BLT Case No. 1155
of 2015, and further to set aside the orders dated 21.07.2015 and
04.08.2015 passed in Land Ceiling Revision No. 11 of 2008 by
the Divisional Commissioner, Patna.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
order passed by the BLT dated 14.11.2016 has been challenged,
and a request has been made to set aside the order passed by the
Bihar Land Tribunal.
10. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand,
submits that the present writ petition is not maintainable for two
reasons. Firstly, against the order dated 14.11.2016 by the Bihar
Land Tribunal, a review was filed, in which a final order was
passed on 05.02.2018. However, the said review order has not
been challenged before this Court. He submits that, for this
reason alone, the writ petition is not maintainable. Secondly,
under the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and
Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to
as the ‘Act of 1961’), Section 16(3) of Act of 1961 was deleted
in the year 2019, and Section 16(4)(i) and (ii) of Act of 1961
were inserted. According to the amended provisions, any matter
Patna High Court CWJC No.16159 of 2018(3) dt.04-08-2025
4/6
or proceeding pending in any court other than those mentioned
under the Act of 1961 shall be deemed to have abated.
11. Counsel further submits that since the matter
stands abated, the petitioners have no enforceable right,
particularly in view of the effect of the repeal of Section 16(3)
of Act of 1961, which is addressed in Section 16(4)(ii) of the
Act of 1961. As per this provision, the only entitlement
available is that any purchase money, together with a sum equal
to 10% thereof, already legally deposited shall be refunded, to
the depositor without any interest. Therefore, he submits that the
petitioner is only entitled to a refund of the purchase amount
along with 10% of the same, and no other relief can be granted.
12. After hearing the parties and upon perusal of the
record, it transpires to this Court that the Bihar Land Tribunal
has passed an order directing that the purchase money, which is
still lying in the District Treasury, the entire consideration
amount will be paid to the purchaser with compound interest
thereon to be calculated from the year 1992, i.e., the date on
which registration of the sale deed was completed, and the
calculation of interest will be done on the basis of bank induced
rate existing / changing time to time.
13. It further transpires to this Court that, after the
Patna High Court CWJC No.16159 of 2018(3) dt.04-08-2025
5/6
repeal of Section 16(3) of the Act of 1961, the pending matters
relating to pre-emption have abated, and the effect of such
abatement is limited only to the refund of the amount kept in the
Treasury, along with a sum equal to 10% thereof already legally
deposited. Since the decision of the Bihar Land Tribunal goes
beyond the scope of the amended law, therefore, the petitioners
shall not be entitled for taking compound interest. They shall be
entitled only to receive the purchase money, together with a sum
equal to 10% thereof, actually deposited, which shall be
refunded to the depositor without interest. The petitioner shall
be at liberty to receive the said amount.
14. From the pleadings, it also transpires that
possession is still with the depositor, however, due to the change
in law, the depositor has no option but to return the possession
of the said land to the landowner or to any other person who is
now interested through the landowner.
15. The petitioners are directed to hand over the
possession of the land to the landowner within 90 days from the
date of receipt of the amount deposited by him. It is made clear
that, in case the petitioners intentionally fail to take steps for
returning the land within six months, the landowner shall have
the right to initiate legal proceedings for recovery of possession,
Patna High Court CWJC No.16159 of 2018(3) dt.04-08-2025
6/6
in accordance with law.
16. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands
disposed off.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-
U T