IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3586 of 2025 ====================================================== Khalid Hussain S/o- Usman Khan, Resident of Ward No.-2, Village- Akbarpur, Panchayat Akbarpur, Malhipatti, P.O.- Rohtas, P.S.- Rohtas, District- Rohtas, Bihar, Pincode-821311. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Revenue and Land Reforms Department. 2. The Collector, Rohtas. 3. The Additional Collector, Rohtas. 4. The Deputy Collector Land Reforms (D.C.L.R.), Dehri, Rohtas. 5. The Circle Officer, Rohtas. 6. Aftab Ahmad S/o- Late Fakhruddin Khan, Resident of Village- Akbarpur, Panchayat Akbarpur, Malhipatti, P.O.- Rohtas, P.S. Rohtas, District- Rohtas, Bihar, Pincode-821311. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Azimuddin, Advocate : Mr. Akash Kumar, Advocate : Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Addl. Advocate General (09) : Mr. Braj Bhushan Mishra, AC to AAG-9 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 3 17-08-2026 Heard the parties. 2. The present petition has been preferred for the grant of following relief(s): “(i) for commanding the Circle Officer, Rohtas, to pass the order for Mutation in favour of the petitioner in the Mutation Case No-314/ Year 13-14, which is pending before the Circle Officer, Rohtas. Patna High Court CWJC No.3586 of 2025(3) dt.17-08-2026 2/5 (ii) for issuing a direction to the Circle Officer, Rohtas, to ensure strict compliance with the Letter No.959 and dated 21.10.2024, passed in Mutation Appeal Case No.122/2013-2014 by the Deputy Collector Land Reforms (D.C.L.R.), Dehri, Rohtas, whereby and whereunder the D.C.L.R., Dehri, Rohtas, has directed the Circle Officer, Rohtas, to pass an order in favor of the petitioner in Mutation Case No.314/ Year 2013- 14. Furthermore, upon implementation of the said order, the Circle Officer, Rohtas, has also been directed to duly inform the D.C.L.R., Dehri, Rohtas, regarding the execution of the mutation order within 72 hours and to submit a compliance report accordingly. (iii) for grant of any other relief/reliefs for which the Petitioner is found entitled in the facts and Circumstances of the Case.” 3. At the outset, learned State counsel submits that the case is fit to be rejected for want of non-impleadment of necessary parties, the submission is that despite the counter affidavit filed by the Circle Officer, Rohtas clearly show in Patna High Court CWJC No.3586 of 2025(3) dt.17-08-2026 3/5 paragraph no.7 that one Dhanwantri Devi alongwith others are having physical possession and their names stand recorded in Register-II, they have not been impleaded as respondents. 4. The submission is that the counter affidavit was served upon the petitioner on 23.04.2025 and still no Interlocutory Application was preferred for impleading them as the party respondents. In that background, the submission is that the petition be dismissed for non-joinder of the necessary parties. 5. The further submission is that repeatedly, the petitioner has preferred petition before the Circle Officer, Rohtas which stands rejected but instead of moving before the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Dehri, Rohtas, the present writ petition. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner has taken this Court to paragraph no.30 to show that the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Dehri, Rohtas vide his office letter no.959 dated 21.10.2024 directed the concerned Circle Officer, to pass an appropriate order on the Mutation Case pending before the said court but that has not been answered in the counter affidavit. 7. Though this Court has gone through the counter Patna High Court CWJC No.3586 of 2025(3) dt.17-08-2026 4/5 affidavit and has seen that the Circle Officer, Rohtas has skipped the said point raised by the petitioner, learned State counsel submits that if the last paragraph of the letter no.959 dated 21.10.2024 is perused, it shows that since the year 2013-14, the Mutation Case No.122 of 2013-14 is pending. However, he completely suppressed the fact that not only it stands rejected his successive petitions also got rejected. 8. It is to be noted that the petitioner stated his case with the submission that since the year 2013-14, the Circle Officer is sitting over the Mutation Application. 9. However, the fact remains that the lots of water has flown down the ganges and after the year 2013-14, several petitions were filed for mutation which got dismissed/rejected between the year 2018 to 2023-24 by the successive Circle Officer. 10. Clearly, the petitioner tried to hoodwink this Court by suppressing these facts. He is playing hide and seek game inasmuch as on the one hand, he keeps on preferring petitions before the Circle Officer and on the other hand, he tries to make out a case before the higher authorities as also before the Patna High Court that since the year 2013-14, the Circle Officer, Rohtas is sitting over the matter. Patna High Court CWJC No.3586 of 2025(3) dt.17-08-2026 5/5 11. It is a fit case which needs to be dismissed with heavy cost not only due to non-joinder of necessary parties for the suppression of facts. The learned counsel is cautioned to be careful in future before presenting a distorted version before the court. 12. However, in the interest of justice, the Court refrains from dismissed the petition with cost and instead allows the petitioner to challenge the last rejection order before the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Dehri, Rohtas. 13. If such petition is preferred in the next four weeks, the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Dehri, Rohtas shall be taking the matter to its logical conclusion at an earliest. 14. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation. vinayak/- (Rajiv Roy, J) U