SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 1723

PATNA HIGH COURT
Sanjay Kumar
CWJC-5734/2025



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5734 of 2025 ======================================================

Sanjay Kumar Son of Baleshwar Singh, Resident of Village and Post-

Manjhos, Block, Circle and P.S.- Makhdumpur, District- Jehanabad.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Director, Panchayati Raj Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

4. The District Magistrate, Jehanabad.

5. The Dy. Development Commissioner, Jehanabad.

6. The District Panchayati Raj Officer, Jehanabad.

7. The Sub Divisional Officer, Jehanabad.

8. The Block Development Officer, Block- Makhdumpur, District- Jehanabad.

9. The Circle Officer, Circle- Makhdumpur, District- Jehanabad.

... ... Respondent/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Advocate General ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER (Per: MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY)

2 01-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Advocate General for the State.

2. The petitioner who describes himself as a representative of Manjhos Panchayat and claims to be associated with a national political party has filed the instant case in the nature of a public interest litigation praying to restrain the respondents from constructing the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan in village Sagarpur under Gram Panchayat-Manjhos in the District of Jehanabad.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that a meeting was convened by the District Panchayati Raj Officer, Jehanabad for selection of land and for construction of the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan wherein the Circle Officer, the Block Development Officer and the Block Panchayati Raj Officer participated. Inspite of land for construction of Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan in accordance with guidelines issued by the Government of Bihar being available near the Panchayat head office, ignoring the same the Circle Officer, Makhdumpur submitted a fabricated report for construction of the Bhawan 3-4 kilometers away in village Sagarpur.

4. It was contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the land proposed for construction of the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan is disputed by the land owners who filed their representation before the Circle Officer along with the rent receipt dated 30.3.2015 for the year 2014-15. Further referring to the contents of the supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the owners of the land have also filed Title Suit no.55 of 2025 in the Court of the learned Sub-Judge-I, Jehanabad praying for declaration of their title and for a decree of permanent injunction. As such learned counsel for the petitioner prays that the respondents be restrained from constructing the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan at the disputed site in village- Sagarpur.

5. Opposing the application learned Advocate General appearing for the State submits that from the contents of the petition itself it would be evident that the petitioner has no locus standi to file the instant application. From the averments made in the supplementary affidavit itself it would be evident that some individuals have filed a title suit which is pending in the Court of learned Sub-Judge-I, Jehanabad and for this reason also the instant application is not maintainable. It is lastly submitted that so far as this petitioner is concerned, he has not made out any case for any order to be passed by this Court specially when the title suit filed by persons claiming to be the owners of the land is pending in the learned Court below.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the materials on record this Court finds that the land in question in villa

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top