JUDGMENT :

PURNENDU SINGH, J.

Heard Mr. Brij Bihari Tiwary, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Kumar Manish, learned SC 5 along with Mr. Kumar Pankaj, learned AC to SC 5 for the State.

2. Petitioner has inter alia prayed for following reliefs in the paragraphs No.1 of the writ petition:-

“(i) In the nature of certiorari for setting aside the order dated 03.12.2025 passed in Mutation Case NO.1154 /2025-2026 by the Circle Officer, Sonbersa whereby and whereunder the Mutation application of the petitioner has been rejected.

ii. In the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondent authorities to enter the name of the petitioner in mutation records in view of direction passed by the learned D.C.L.R., Sitamarhi Sadar vide order dated 01.02.2025 in Mutation Appeal No.1003/2024-25 and in view of order dated 26.08.1995 passed in T.S. No.52/1986, 21/1995 learned Sub Judge, III, Sitamarhi.

iii. In the nature of mandamus directing and commanding particularly the Collector, Sitamarhi (respondent 2) to take action against the Circle Officer, Sonbarsa who his intentionally harassing the petitioner and rejecting the claim of mutation repeatedly.

iv. For issuance of any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is entitled for in the fact and circumstances of the instant case.”

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had purchased a piece of land vide a registered sale deed dated 22.07.2023 from one Mukund Kumar Shahi, situated in Mauza- Sihwahini, P.S. Sonbarsa, District, Sitamarhi. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application before the Circle Officer, Sonebarsa for mutation of the said land. The Circle Officer, Sonbarsa rejected the application of the petitioner vide order dated 14.06.2024. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred an appeal bearing mutation Appeal No.1003/2024-2025 before the D.C.L.R., Sitamarhi Sadar and who vide order dated 01.02.2025 (Annexure P/4) quashed and set aside the order dated 14.06.2024 passed by the Circle Officer, Sonebarsa and remanded the matter to the Circle Officer to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. However, without complying with the direction and order passed in Mutation Appeal No.1003/2024-25 by the D.C.L.R., Sitamarhi Sadar, the Circle Officer again rejected the application of the petitioner. Learned counsel further submitted that after remand, the Circle Officer again on the basis of similar reason has reiterated the order dated 14.06.2024, without applying his mind by passing a speaking order in accordance with the mandate of Section 6 of the Bihar Land Mutation Act, 2011. He further submitted that the Circle Officer has not conducted inquiry on his own, rather he relied upon the report of the Karmchari dated 29.06.2025 and in the most mechanical manner without analyzing the case of the respective parties, the Circle Officer has again deliberately rejected the application for mutation of the land, though he has admitted that the objections were received from 28-30 persons, who were in possession of the land, which the petitioner had purchased by a valid sale deed dated 22.07.2023, executed by the grandson of the original land holder late Shiya Sharan Shai, in whose name the Jamabandi Nos.1294 and 1295 are standing. Aggrieved by the arbitrary action of the Circle Officer, learned counsel submitted that though the petitioner has alternative remedy to file appeal before the D.C.L.R. against the order dated 03.12.2025 but the same will be of no relevance, considering the admitted fact that the Circle Officer is pre-determined to reject the application of the petitioner without assigning any reason. The reason which the Circle officer has assigned is not in accordance with the law as the impugned order has been passed without mentioning the respective case of the petitioner and the objectors and also without giving the names of the objectors who according to the Circle Officer are in possession of the l