Patna High Court – Orders
Govind Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 5 August, 2025
Author: Satyavrat Verma
Bench: Satyavrat Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8396 of 2025
======================================================
1. Govind Kumar Son of Mohan Prasad Resident of Village-Motihari
Sonapatti, P.S.-Motihari District-East Champaran, Motihari.
2. Prity Sarraf Wife of Sri Govind Kumar Resident of Village-Motihari
Sonarpatti, P.S.-Motihari, District-East Champaran, Motihari.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Registration Excise and
Prohibition Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Revenue and Land Reform Department
Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari.
4. The Additional Collector (Ceiling) East Champaran, Motihari.
5. The District Sub Registrar, District Sub Registry Office, East Champaran,
Motihari.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Kanishk Kaustubh, Adv.
Mr. Rajnish Prakash, Adv.
Ms. Lakshmi Kumari, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Md. Raisul Haque, Standing Counsel (10)
Md. Obaidullah, AC to SC-10
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 05-08-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.
Ranjeet Kumar and learned AC to SC-10 for the State.
2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submits that the authorities are breaching the orders
of this Court with impunity. It is next submitted that identical
matter had travelled to this Court. It is next submitted that
Patna High Court CWJC No.8396 of 2025(2) dt.05-08-2025
2/9
CWJC No. 4532 of 2024 (Ramacast Limited Vs. The State of
Bihar & Ors.) and CWJC No. 13711 of 2024 (Harshvardhan
Baheti Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) were filed before this
Court. It is submitted that Ramacast Limited and Harshvardhan
Baheti had approached this Court, as the land which they had
purchased was put in the restriction list. It is next submitted that
Ramacast Limited had purchased the land from M/s. Hanuman
Sugar & Industries Limited, Motihari and parents of
Harshvardhan Baheti had also purchased land from the aforesaid
Sugar Mills. It is submitted that the land of Hanuman Sugar
Mills formed subject matter of land ceiling Case No. 03 of
1983-84, but the purchased land of Ramacast and parents of
Harshvardhan Baheti was separated from the land ceiling
proceeding in pursuance of the orders of this Court. It is also
submitted that several litigation thereafter continued and
litigation went up to the Hon’ble Supreme Court and ultimately
the State of Bihar lost. It is submitted that the lands purchased
by Ramacast Limited and parents of Harshvardhan Baheti were
put in the restriction list, as such, Harshvardhan Baheti earlier
had approached this Court by filing CWJC No. 6837 of 2022
seeking permission to executed sale deeds with respect to the
purchased land of his parents from Hanuman Sugar and
Patna High Court CWJC No.8396 of 2025(2) dt.05-08-2025
3/9
Industries Limited, Motihari. It is submitted that CWJC No.
6837 of 2022 was allowed by an order dated 18.08.2022
(Annexure- P/10). It is next submitted that in pursuance of the
order dated 18.08.2022 in CWJC No. 6837 of 2022,
Harshvardhan Baheti sold the purchased land of his parents
from Hanuman Sugar & Industries Limited to the instant
petitioners. It is further submitted that Harshvardhan Baheti
again approached this Court by filing CWJC No. 13711 of 2024,
for executing further sale deeds with respect to the purchased
land of his mother from Hanuman Sugar & Industries Limited,
the said CWJC No. 13711 of 2024 was allowed by an order
dated 16.05.2025.
3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners draws the attention of the Court to Para-9 of the
order dated 16.05.2025 in CWJC No. 13711 of 2024 to submit
that while disposing of the aforesaid writ application, this Court
at Para-9 had recorded- The Court appreciates the fair
submission made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the State and thus for the present refrains from passing any
adverse orders against the authorities.
4. It is submitted that the land purchased by the
instant petitioners purchased from Harshvardhan Baheti, has
Patna High Court CWJC No.8396 of 2025(2) dt.05-08-2025
4/9
been put in the restriction list for which the instant writ
application has been filed seeking a direction upon the
authorities to remove the land purchased by the petitioners from
Harshvardhan Baheti from the restriction list on the ground that
Harshvardhan Baheti had executed the sale deed in favour of the
petitioners in pursuance of the order dated 18.08.2022 in CWJC
No. 6837 of 2022.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners next submits
that for identical relief, Ramacast Limited had also approached
this Court by filing CWJC No. 4532 of 2024 and the same was
allowed by an order dated 07.04.2025 wherein at Para-9, the
same observation was recorded as recorded in CWJC No. 13711
of 2024. The learned counsel, thus, submits that it absolutely
does not stand to reason that as to why the authorities are acting
in a manner, which gives an impression that they are violating
the orders of this Court with impunity. It is also submitted that
authorities are aware that since petitioners have moved this
Court, as such, no action will be taken against them rather the
writ application will be disposed of in terms of the order dated
16.05.2025 in CWJC No. 13711 of 2024 and order dated
07.04.2025 in CWJC No. 4532 of 2024, further the authorities
are even aware that in the event if the instant writ application is
Patna High Court CWJC No.8396 of 2025(2) dt.05-08-2025
5/9
disposed of and thereafter the order is not complied for some
times, the petitioners again will have to approach this Court by
filing a contempt application and when the contempt application
shall be taken up, at that point of time, the authorities will come
out with a plea that the order has been complied, but then it is a
long drawn process. It is next submitted that it is becoming habit
of the authorities in the State of Bihar not to take the orders of
the Court seriously. It is next submitted that the land involved in
the instant writ application ought to have been removed from
the restriction list immediately, the moment the authorities
became aware that the sale deed in respect of the land in dispute
in the instant writ application has been executed in terms of the
order dated 18.08.2022 in CWJC No. 6837 of 2022.
6. The Court, on the earlier occasion, at Para-9 in
CWJC No. 4532 of 2024 and CWJC No. 13711 of 2024 had
recorded that the Court, for the present, refrains from passing
any adverse orders against the authorities, but then the instant
with application gives reason to the Court to stricture the
authorities for harassing the petitioners, but then the Court is
aware of its limitation that stricture cannot be passed in a
mechanical manner, for that an opportunity of hearing is to be
given to the authorities to explain their side, the Court is making
Patna High Court CWJC No.8396 of 2025(2) dt.05-08-2025
6/9
this observation on strenuous plea raised by the learned State
counsel, who submits that he will make the authorities stand,
failing which they will be liable for the consequences which
would entail.
7. The learned State counsel seeks ten days’ time for
filing a counter affidavit.
8. Separate counter affidavit shall be filed by the
District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari and District
Sub-Registar, East Champaran Motihari, duly sworn by them.
9. The counter affidavit, apart from giving para-wise
reply of the pleadings made in the writ application, shall also
deal with the contentions raised by the petitioners as recorded
hereinabove in the order.
10. Put up this case on 25.08.2025 at 10:30 AM.
11. It is made clear that if counter affidavit is not filed
on or before 22.08.2025, in that event the Court may consider
the desirability of summoning the District Magistrate, East
Champaran, Motihari along with District Sub-Registrar, East
Champaran.
12. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioners submits that apart from this case, he has
filed 15 others writ applications claiming the same relief, the
Patna High Court CWJC No.8396 of 2025(2) dt.05-08-2025
7/9
only difference is that seller is the same, but purchasers are
different and the writ applications are CWJC No. 6782 of 2025
(Birendra Singh Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.), CWJC No.
6876 of 2025 (Ajay Kumar Singh Vs. The State of Bihar &
Ors.), CWJC No. 6664 of 2025 (Sushma Devi Vs. The State of
Bihar & Ors.), CWJC No. 7445 of 2025 (Chuman Tiwari Vs.
The State of Bihar & Ors.), CWJC No. 6683 of 2025 (Sunil
Kumar Singh Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.), CWJC No. 7600
of 2025 (Arvind Kumar Singh Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.),
CWJC No. 7444 of 2025 (Amaresh Kumar Vs. The State of
Bihar & Ors.), CWJC No. 7269 of 2025 (Babita Devi & Babita
Kumari Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.), CWJC No. 7700 of
2025 (Md. Arman Khan Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.), CWJC
No. 7187 of 2025 (Abhimanyu Kumar Vs. The State of Bihar &
Ors.), CWJC No. 7262 of 2025 (Rekha Rani & Anr. Vs. The
State of Bihar & Ors.), CWJC No. 7205 of 2025 (Uma Kant
Giri Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.), CWJC No. 7272 of 2025
(Shrita Kumar Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.), CWJC No. 7434
of 2025 (Sima Tiwari Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.) and CWJC
No. 7360 of 2025 (Vishwanath Prasad Vs. The State of Bihar &
Ors.).
13. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.8396 of 2025(2) dt.05-08-2025
8/9
petitioners, thus, submits that one can understand the anguish of
the citizens.
14. The petitioners through their learned counsel
would be at liberty to meet the District Magistrate, East
Champaran, Motihari along with a copy of this order on or
before 18.08.2025 for making the District Magistrate to see
reason that innocent people are not harassed in the manner they
are being harassed.
15. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners further submits that what is not in dispute rather
stands admitted that is that parents of Harshvardhan Baheti had
purchased the land from Hanuman Sugar & Industries Limited,
Motihari and after their death, Harshvardhan Baheti executed
sale deed with respect to the purchased land of his parents, after
the same was separated from the aforesaid ceiling proceeding. It
is also submitted that some of the sale deeds were executed
prior to order dated 18.08.2022 in CWJC No. 6837 of 2022 and
some of the sale deeds were executed after the aforesaid order,
but then it is submitted that execution of the sale deeds before or
after the order dated 18.08.2022 in CWJC No. 6837 of 2022
shall not make any difference, as the purchased land of the
parents of Harshvardhan Baheti was not subject matter of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.8396 of 2025(2) dt.05-08-2025
9/9
ceiling proceeding.
16. The office is directed to list all the aforesaid 16
writ applications on 25.08.2025 separately.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U