IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10551 of 2025 ====================================================== 1. Jitendra Goswami alias Jitendra Koiri S/o Late Jamuna Goswami alias Jamuna Koiri, R/o Village- Dhanauti, P.O. and P.S- Katiya, District- Gopalganj, at present R/o Village- Semra Labedaha, P.S.- Piprasi, District- West Champaran. 2. Dinesh Kushwaha @ Dinesh S/o- Arjun Kushwaha, R/o Shripatinagar, P.O- Semra Labedaha, P.S.- Piprasi, District- West Champaran. 3. Dinanath Kushwaha S/o- Arjun Kushwaha, R/o Shripatinagar, P.O- Semra Labedaha, P.S.- Piprasi, District- West Champaran. 4. Ramasre S/o- Budhram Kushwaha, R/o Shripatinagar, P.O- Semra Labedaha, P.S.- Piprasi, District- West Champaran. 5. Premshila Devi W/o Rajkishore Kushwaha, R/o Shripatinagar, P.O- Semra Labedaha, P.S.- Piprasi, District- West Champaran. 6. Binod @ Binod Kushwaha S/o Arjun Kushwaha, R/o Shripatinagar, P.O- Semra Labedaha, P.S.- Piprasi, District- West Champaran. 7. Nagwanti Devi W/o Narshingh Baitha, R/o Shripatinagar, P.O- Semra Labedaha, P.S.- Piprasi, District- West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The District Magistrate, West Champaran at Bettiah. 3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Bagaha, District- West Champaran. 4. The Circle Officer, Piprasi District- West Champaran. 5. The Officer Incharge, Piprasi, District- West Champaran. 6. Kunjbihari Goswami Chela of Late Shyambihari Goswami, R/o Village- Kotwa Kabir Math, P.O- Kotwa, P.S- Nebua Naurangia, District- Kushi Nagar, At Present R/o Village and P.O- Semra Labedaha, Sripat Nagar, P.S- Piprasi, District- West Champaran at Bettiah. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Aakash Choudhary, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Pleader (06) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 4 30-03-2026 Heard Mr. Aakash Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Patna High Court CWJC No.10551 of 2025(4) dt.30-03-2026 2/3 2. The present application has been preferred: filed for issuance of an appropriate writ / order / direction for quashing the notice dated 21.08.2024 issued under the signature of Respondent No. 4 i.e., the Circle Officer, Piprasi, as contained in Annexure - P/6, whereby the Petitioners have been directed to appear before him and produced evidence with regard to illegal possession over the land in question appertaining to revenue Thana no. 52, Khata No. 854, Khesra No. 2035 situated at Semra Labedaha, P.S - Piprasi, District - West Champaran without mentioning any case number. 3. Two notices have been challenged by the petitioner, both issued by the Circle Officer, Piprasi, West Champaran. First is the notice dated 21.08.2024 and the second one is 11.04.2025 where it has been recorded that they have encroached the land in question and as such, to submit their show cause why the same is not removed. 4. The details of the land is/are as follows: Khata no.- 854; khesra no.- 2035 under Semra, Piprasi, West Champaran. 5. Learned State Counsel submits that admittedly, two notices have been issued. Instead of replying to it, the petitioner after the second notice served, rushed to the Court. The further Patna High Court CWJC No.10551 of 2025(4) dt.30-03-2026 3/3 submission is that though pleadings show that the Bihar State Religious Trust Board has an active role to play in the matter, surprisingly, it has not been made party respondent. 6. This Court has taken note of the two notices. The petitioner failed to reply to the said notice by filing show cause. He has all the power in the world to put forward his case along with the supporting documents so that the Circle Officer, Piprasi takes a decision in the matter. 7. As rightly pointed out by learned State Counsel that the Circle Officer, Piprasi too slept over the matter after the two notices served upon the petitioner and it is not the case of the petitioners that he/she took further steps. 8. In that background, if fresh notice comes and/or any reminder is sent by the Circle Officer, Piprasi, the petitioners are well advised to reply to the said show cause notice and satisfy the respondent regarding their claim over the land which according to them is an ancestral property. 9. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed of. Vijay Singh/- (Rajiv Roy, J) U