Patna High Court
Sunil Kumar Singh Alias Sunil Singh vs The State Of Bihar on 19 June, 2025
Author: Anshuman
Bench: Anshuman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13203 of 2019
======================================================
1. Sunil Kumar Singh alias Sunil Singh S/o Baij Nath Singh Resident of
Village Shukha Nagar,P.S. Pratapganj,Dist.Supaul
2. Sanjay Kumar Singh Alias Sanjay Singh S/o Baij Nath Singh Resident of
Village Shukha Nagar,P.S. Pratapganj,Dist.Supaul
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Revenue Land Reforms
Department,Govt. of Bihar,Patna
2. The Circle Officer, Pratapganj, Dist.Supaul
3. Bhupendraj Lal Das S/o Sahdeolal Das Resident of Village Parsa
Bairwal,P.S. Chhatapur,Dist.Supaul
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Dhurjati Kr. Prasad, G.P. 14
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 19-06-2025
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
counsel for the State and learned counsel for the private
respondent.
2. The present writ petition has been filed for
quashing Letter No. 327-2, dated 10.05.2019, issued by the
Circle Officer, Pratapganj (Annexure-1), whereby the Circle
Officer has cancelled the Jamabandi of the petitioners in respect
of the land in question, allegedly in collusion with the private
respondent, on the pretext of compliance of the order dated
21.01.2019
passed in CWJC No. 12103 of 2016 (Bhupendra Lal
Das v. The State of Bihar & Ors.) by this Hon’ble Court.
Patna High Court CWJC No.13203 of 2019 dt.19-06-2025
2/8
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners had filed B.L.D.R. Case No. 13 of 2012 before
the Court of D.C.L.R., Birpur, which was allowed in their
favour on 19.04.2012. Counsel further submits that the private
respondent preferred B.L.D.R. Appeal No. 198 of 2012 before
the Commissioner, Kosi Division, Saharsa, which was dismissed
on 26.12.2014. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order
passed in B.L.D.R. Appeal No. 198 of 2012, the private
respondent preferred B.L.T. Case No. 106 of 2015, which was
disposed of on 10.05.2016 with a direction to decide the
question of title through the competent Civil Court.
4. Thereafter, the private respondent filed CWJC
No. 12103 of 2016 before this Hon’ble Court against the said
order, which was disposed of on 21.01.2019 with specific
direction to dispose of the case in light of Maheshwar Mandal
& Anr. v. The State of Bihar & Ors., reported in 2018 (3) PLJR
1007 and allowed to the extent that the decision of the Deputy
Collector, Land Reforms, on the question of title shall not be
treated to be an adjudication on respective right, title and
interest of the parties, and directed that the parties shall be free
to approach the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction for
adjudication of their disputes.
Patna High Court CWJC No.13203 of 2019 dt.19-06-2025
3/8
5. Counsel further submits that the petitioners, in
compliance with the aforesaid direction, filed Title Suit No. 34
of 2019 before the Court of Sub-Judge, Birpur on 28.03.2019
for declaration of right and title over the land in question.
Counsel further submits that during the pendency of the
aforesaid Title Suit, the Circle Officer, Pratapganj, in collusion
with the private respondent, cancelled the Jamabandi of the
petitioners under the pretext of compliance with the order dated
21.01.2019 passed in CWJC No. 12103 of 2016. Counsel also
submits that the Circle Officer passed the impugned order
without issuing any notice to the petitioners, and as such, the
said order has been passed in gross violation of the principles of
natural justice. It is further submitted that the proceeding was
initiated against the father of the petitioners, who had already
died. Counsel further submits that the petitioners have more
respect of the order passed by this Hon’ble Court to resolve the
dispute through the competent Civil Court. However, instead
thereof, the concerned authority has taken a shortcut route by
adopting illegal means.
6. It is also submitted that although the notice was
issued on 03.04.2019, the mutation order was passed on
10.05.2019 and published vide Letter No. 327-2 dated
Patna High Court CWJC No.13203 of 2019 dt.19-06-2025
4/8
10.05.2019. Counsel submits that the said mutation order is in
gross violation of the provisions of the Mutation Act, as no such
order could have been passed during the pendency of the title
suit. Counsel submits that, in any view of the matter, the
impugned order is bad in law.
7. Learned counsel for the State submits that by the
impugned letter, it transpires that the position prior to the order
passed in the B.L.D.R. has been restored. Counsel further
submits that this Hon’ble Court, in CWJC No. 12103 of 2016,
has categorically held that the writ petition is allowed to the
extent that the decision of the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms,
on the question of title, shall not be treated to be an adjudication
on respective right, title and interest of the parties and then
liberty was granted to the parties to approach to the Civil Court
of competent jurisdiction for adjudication of their dispute.
8. Counsel further submits that since this Hon’ble
Court has been pleased to hold that the application is allowed
only in respect of the question of title then the impugned order
is correct in law. However, he fairly submits that if a Title Suit is
pending, then in such case, Section 6(12) of the Bihar Land
Mutation Act, 2011 bars the Circle Officer from carrying out
mutation.
Patna High Court CWJC No.13203 of 2019 dt.19-06-2025
5/8
9. Learned counsel for the private respondent
submits that they are claiming the property in question by virtue
of a sale deed. Counsel submits that the said sale deed was
executed in the year 1952, and that the petitioners have, by
some means, obtained an order from the B.L.D.R. through
which correction was made in the Jamabandi.
10. Counsel further submits that the petitioners are
playing foul before this Hon’ble Court, as the longstanding
Jamabandi in the name of the private respondent was disturbed
in the year 2012 by the order passed by the B.L.D.R. It is
submitted that the order passed by the D.C.L.R. under the
B.L.D.R. Act was challenged before the Commissioner, and the
order of the Commissioner was further challenged before the
B.L.T. The order passed by the B.L.T. was then challenged
before this Hon’ble Court in CWJC No. 12103 of 2016. This
Hon’ble Court was pleased to disregard the adjudication made
by the D.C.L.R. on the question of title, on the basis of which
the name of the petitioners had been inserted in the Jamabandi.
11. Counsel further submits that the Circle Officer
has passed the impugned order completely in accordance with
law and in full compliance with the directions issued in CWJC
No. 12103 of 2016, and there is no illegality in the said order.
Patna High Court CWJC No.13203 of 2019 dt.19-06-2025
6/8
Counsel also submits that the petitioners, without availing the
alternative remedy, have directly approached this Hon’ble
Court.
12. Counsel further submits that the petitioners are
not aware whether any Title Suit is pending or not, but they are
aware of the fact that this Hon’ble Court has been pleased to
decide the writ petition by holding that the D.C.L.R. is not
competent for adjudication of the property in question.
According to him, when the D.C.L.R. had no authority or
jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter, then the situation prior to
the decision of the B.L.T. ought to be restored, and the Circle
Officer has basically restored the said order, and therefore, the
writ petition is fit to be dismissed.
13. After hearing the parties, it transpires to this
Court that Title Suit No. 34 of 2019 is pending before the Sub-
Judge, Birpur, i.e., the Court of competent jurisdiction. In the
said title suit, admission has been made and notices were
directed to be issued vide order dated 03.04.2019, whereas the
Circle Officer proceeded to pass an order on 10.05.2019,
changing the Jamabandi and passed order on mutation.
14. Section 6(12) of the Bihar Land Mutation Act,
2011 clearly is very much clear on this issue that when a title
Patna High Court CWJC No.13203 of 2019 dt.19-06-2025
7/8
suit is pending with respect to the property in dispute, the Circle
Officer shall not pass any order regarding mutation.
15. It further transpires to this Court that the
Hon’ble High Court, in CWJC No. 12103 of 2016, has pleased
to show his concern on the question of title adjudicated by the
D.C.L.R., but did not give any finding on the question of
possession.
16. This Court is of the firm view that the property
in dispute must be preserved in its existing condition, and no
third-party rights shall be created either by the petitioners or by
the respondent.
17. It is due to this reason, without recording any
finding on the question of possession, this Court hereby directs
that neither the petitioners nor the private respondent shall
create any third-party rights in respect of the property in
question, namely, Khata No. 129, Khesra Nos. 1670, 1627,
1669, 1700, and 1696, situated at Mauja Sukhanagar.
18. The Circle Officer, Pratapganj, District-Supaul,
is directed not to take any further action in the matter until Title
Suit No. 34 of 2019 attains finality. It is made clear that the
impugned order, i.e., Letter No. 327-2 dated 10.05.2019, passed
by the Circle Officer, shall remain stayed until the final
Patna High Court CWJC No.13203 of 2019 dt.19-06-2025
8/8
adjudication of the dispute in Title Suit No. 34 of 2019. Both
parties are directed to appear before the Civil Court for final
adjudication of the dispute.
19. With this direction the writ petition stands
disposed off.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-
AFR/NAFR NA CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 24.06.2025 Transmission Date NA