Patna High Court
CWJC/12305/2026 of Bishwanath Prasad @ Vishwanath Kandu @ Vishwanath Prasad, Vs The State of Bihar on 17 August 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12305 of 2026 ====================================================== Bishwanath Prasad @ Vishwanath Kandu @ Vishwanath Prasad, Son of late Moti Saw @ Moti Kandu, Resident of Tekari Road, Opp Biscuit Factory, Village- Chhotki Delha,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12305 of 2026
======================================================
Bishwanath Prasad @ Vishwanath Kandu @ Vishwanath Prasad, Son of late Moti Saw @ Moti Kandu, Resident of Tekari Road, Opp Biscuit Factory, Village- Chhotki Delha, P.S.- Delha, District- Gaya, Bihar- 823002.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar Through the Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar at Patna.
2.
The Divisional Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya.
3.
The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Gaya.
4.
The Additional Collector, Gaya.
5.
The Deputy Collector Land Reforms (D.C.L.R.), Sadar, Gaya.
6.
The Circle Officer, Bodh- Gaya.
... ... Respondent/s
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr. Sushant Srivastava, Advocate
:
Mr. Sanchay Srivastava, Advocate
:
Mrs. Sonali Priya, Advocate
:
Mr. Ashish Kumar Patil, Advocate
For the Respondent/s
:
Mr. Government Advocate (5)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
17-08-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the following relief/s: “(i) for issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/ direction(s) in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to forthwith fix the rent and mutate the land in question in favour of the petitioner and to issue rent receipts;
(ii) for issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/ direction(s) in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to give due effect to the judgment and decree. dated 11.03.2010 passed by the competent Civil Court and to refrain from acting contrary thereto while deciding the petitioner's claim for rent fixation and mutation:
(iii) for issuance of an appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/ direction(s) to directing the respondent authorities to ensure that all consequential revenue records, including rent fixation and mutation entries, are corrected in accordance with the decree passed in favour of the petitioner by the Competent Civil Court in accordance with law;
(iv) and for issuance of any other relief or reliefs the petitioner is entitled for.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after fighting a long battle, ultimately, he got relief on the Bihar Land Tribunal (henceforth for short ‘the Tribunal’) in B.L.T. Case No. 548 of 2022 (Vishwanath Kandu @ Vishwanath Prasad vs. State and Ors.) on 26.06.2024. He has taken this Court to the relevant paragraph no. 11 which read as under: “11. In view of the above, orders passed both the appellate and revisional authority are hereby set aside and the matter is remitted back to the appellate authority i.e. Addl. Collector, Gaya whose jurisdiction is co-extensive to that of original authority to decide the matter afresh after providing ample opportunity of hearing to petitioner and conducting enquiry afresh as pointed hereinabove. This case is thus allowed accordingly. Petitioner is directed to appear before the Addl. Collector within four weeks from today and then the Addl. Collector concerned shall fix a firm date to proceed with the case and to decide the matter as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of nine months from the appearance of petitioner. Let send the copy of this order to the Id. Addi. Collector, Gaya for information and needful action in the matter.”
4. The submission is that immediately thereafter, on 18.07.2024 the Rent Fixation Case No. 02 of 2024-25
(Vishwanath Kandu vs The State) was preferred before the learned Additional Collector, Gaya (Now Gayaji).
5. The contention is that two long years have lapsed and the concerned Court is sitting over the matter.
6. Learned State counsel submits that the concerned respondent will dispose it of at an earliest in accordance with law.
7. The statement of the learned State counsel has been recorded and this Court has also incorporated the paragraph no. 11 of the order passed by the B.L.T. two years ago. It is high time that the respondent no. 4, the Additional Collector, Gayaji passes a reasoned order in accordance with law after hearing all the parties by 31.12.2026.
8. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of.
Sanny/- (Rajiv Roy, J) U