IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1014 of 2023 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4805 of 2020 ======================================================

Shyama Devi, aged about 65 years, Gender-Female, Daughter of Late Dwarka Prasad Mandal, Wife of Jaynarayan Mandal, Resident of Village - Tikapatti, Ward - 18, Dhusar Tikapatti, P.S. - Tikapatti, District - Purnea.

... ... Appellant Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Katihar.

4. The Additional District Magistrate, Katihar.

5. The Deputy Collector Land Revenue, Katihar.

6. The Superintendent of Police, Katihar.

7. The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Katihar.

8. The Circle Officer, Sameli, District - Katihar.

9. The Station House Officer, Falka (Pothia), District - Katihar.

10. The Principal, District Institute of Education and Training (D.I.E.T.), Katihar.

... ... Respondents ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Appellant : Mr. Raghvendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Md. Khurshid Alam, A.A.G. 12 ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH)

5 28-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present intra court appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 20.07.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 4805 of 2020, whereby the writ application filed by the appellant was disposed of.

3. The following was the relief sought for by the writ petitioner before the learned Single Judge:

“ The present writ petition has been filed for directing the respondent no.10 not to interfere with the peaceful possession of the piece of land inherited and possessed by the petitioner and, further, for a direction upon the State Respondents to safeguard and protect the Constitutional Right of the petitioner.”

4. The following was the submissions of the parties before the learned Single Judge:

“Counsel for the petitioner submits that the land situated in Mauja-Chandpur, Thana No. 270, Khata No. 649, Khesra No.-4333- 4334, total area measuring 1 Acre 13 Decimal and another land of Mauja- Chandpur, Thana No.-270, Khata No. 4331- 4332, total area measuring 1 Acre 12 Decimal were recorded in the name of petitioner’s father who died on 23.11.1986 and after his death, they came into the possession of the said land.

Counsel for the petitioner further submits that respondent No. 10 is a training institution, namely, District Institute of Education and Training (D.I.E.T.), Tikapatti (Katihar) in whose name, the ancestor of the petitioner and other co-villagers have donated 6 Acre 29 Decimal of land. Counsel submits that the raiyatiland of the petitioner is being disturbed continuously by respondent No. 10. He submits that the said land belongs to petitioner and there are different records by which he is showing that it is his land.

Counsel for the respondent has filed counter-affidavit as well as supplementary counter-affidavit in which it has been submitted that the land in question has been claimed by the Training Centre, Tikapatti and the report of the Circle Officer, Sameli, Katihar which has been prepared upon perusal of Register-2 as well as upon the spot verification indicates that in the registered column by red pen ‘training center, Tikapatti’ for the land in question has been written. It has also come that the name of the petitioner is there and along with his name by red pen the name of training center, Tikapatti has also been entered.”

5. The learned Single Judge after considering the submissions of the parties had made the following observation:

“ Upon hearing the argument of both the parties, it transpires that it is a disputed question of facts which cannot be decided by this Court and, therefore,