IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1997 of 2026 ======================================================

1. Jayant Singh @ Jayant Kumar Son of Late Uday Kumar @ Uday Kumar Singh @ Uday Singh, resident of Village and Post-Masaurha, P.S-Paliganj, District-Patna.

2. Ajit Singh @ Ajit Kumar, Son of Late Uday Kumar @ Uday Kumar Singh, resident of Village and Post-Masaurha, P.S-Paliganj, District-Patna.

3. Chandan Kumar, son of Late Uday Kumar @ Uday Kumar Singh, resident of Village and Post-Masaurha, P.S-Paliganj, District-Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar.

2. Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Paliganj (Patna).

3. The Circle Officer, Paliganj (Patna).

4. Nand Kishore Sharma, Son of Late Ram Naresh Singh, resident of Village and Post-Masaurha, P.S-Paliganj, District-Patna.

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

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Arun Sharma, Advocate.

For the Respondent/s : Government Pleader (19)

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER

2 09-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

2. The petitioners in paragraph no. 1 of the present writ petition have sought, inter alia, following relief(s), which is reproduced hereinafter:-

“(1) For that the petitioners crave indulgence of this Hon'ble Court for issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 13.1.2026 (Annexure-1) passed by Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Paliganj, Patna (in short DCLR) in land Dispute Resolution Case No.44/2025-26 as contained in Annexure- P/1 whereby and whereunder learned D.C.L.R., Paliganj had wrongly and illegally declared the right of respondent. no.4 over the land in disputed Plot No.1286, Khata No.888, Mauza Masaurha, Thana No.305, Area 2.666 dismil and Circle Officer, Paliganj and Thana-in-charge, Paliganj were directed to ensure the handover of the possession of the land in dispute.

(ii) For that to pass any order/orders, diction/direction, command/commands directing the respondents to not interference in the peaceful possession of the petitioner over the land in dispute and its use.

(iii) For that the impugned order 13.1.2026 passed by respondent no.2 in Land Dispute Resolution Case No.44/2025-26, Paliganj, Patna be declared as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction.

(iv) For directing the official respondent to not take any coercive step in the light of impugned order contained in Annexure-1 till final disposal the writ application.

(v) For commanding the respondent to maintain status quo over the land in dispute till final disposal of the writ application..”

3. The brief facts of the Case are that the petitioners’

father purchased 2 2/3 dismil of land with house and homestead situated at Mauza Masaurha, Thana No. 305 by registered Sale Deed No. 673 of 1979 from Late Mankali Devi, the lawful owner of the land. The original sale deed was lost, however, the petitioners obtained a certified copy thereof. Though the survey numbers are wrongly described, the boundaries, nature, and identity of the land are specific, correct, and undisputed. The Respondent No. 4 filed a Land Measurement Case No. 05/2019 for measurement of Plot No. 1287, Khata No. 829, Khesara No. 784, Mauza Masaurha, wherein Petitioner No. 3 was recorded as a boundary holder/tenant. Subsequently, a proceeding under Section 126 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, being Case No. 676(M)/2024 arising out of Paliganj P.S. Non-FIR Case No. 205/24, was initiated against the petitioners. The said proceeding was closed by the Executive Magistrate, Paliganj, holding that the dispute relates to right and title of the land and the same is not amenable to summary proceedings. Despite the above finding, the Respondent No. 4 instituted Case No. 44/20