IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.23937 of 2018 ======================================================

Sanjiv Kumar @ Sanjeev Kumar ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar and Ors ... ... Respondent/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bindhyachal Singh, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Lokesh Kumar Singh, Adv.

Mr. Aakash Singh, Adv.

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Raj Kishore Roy- Gp18 ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

3 06-01-2026 Heard the parties.

2. The present application has been preferred for the following relief(s):

for issuance of an appropriate writ and/or order and/ or direction for quashing the order dated 12.06.2018 passed in Misc. Appeal No. 389 of 2014 by the Divisional Commissioner, Patna whereby the learned Divisional Commissioner has been pleased to confirm the order dated 30.01.2014 passed by the District Magistrate, Patna in Misc. Appeal No. 03 of 2012-13 as well as the order dated 21.02.2012 in Case No.17/11-12 passed by the Sub-divisional Officer, Danapur and refused to interfere in the above said orders of the District Magistrate, Patna and the Sub-divisional Officer, Danapur.

The Sub-divisional Officer, Danapur through its order dated 21.02.2012 in Case No. 17/11/-12, has been pleased to levy the conversion fee of Rs. 3,26,30,400/- (three crore twenty six lakhs thirty thousand four hundred) under section 6(3) read with section 4(1) of Bihar Agriculture Land (Conversion for None Agriculture Purposes) Act 2010 (hereinafter called as the Act) as the land used by the petitioner for non- agricultural purpose without prior permission of the competent authority in the form of functioning of D.P.S. School, Lodipur-Chandmari, Shahpur, Patna.

The land under the dispute is situated under Mauza -Lodipur, Thana No. 29, Khata No. 57, 76 & 37, khesra nos. 638, 641, 615, 616, 614, 613 etc. Area- 5.15 Acre, District- Patna.

3. Despite the clear direction given to the respondents in paragraph 18 of the order dated 17.11.2025 asking them to reply to each and every paragraph of the writ petition, a short affidavit has been filed only narrating about the orders in question. Certainly, the Collector, Patna failed to look into the defunct statements of facts put forward by the office of the Circle Officer and endorsed in a routine manner by the higher officials.

4. In that background, the Collector, Patna is duty-

bound to go through the order dated 17.11.2025 as also each and every paragraph of the writ petition/supplementary affidavit and thereafter ensure that para wise reply answering to all the points in the writ petition/supplementary affidavit in next six weeks.

5. It is made clear that the present affidavit has to be signed by the Collector, Patna. 6. List this case on 17.02.2026.

(Rajiv Roy, J)

Vijay Singh/-

U