IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16416 of 2016 ====================================================== Yogendra Bhagat @ Yogi Bhagat Son of Late Hari Bhagat resident of Gandhi Chowk, Phulparas, P.S. Khutauna, District - Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Collector, Madhubani. 3. The Deputy Collector, Land Reform, Madhubani. 4. The Circle Officer, Phulparas, District - Madhubani. 5. Smt. Usha Devi W/o Raghunath Prasad Sah @ Raghunath Patwa 6. Raju Patwa 7. Lklu Patwa both sons of (6 and 7) Late Anil Patwa 8. Shrawan Patwa s/o Raghunath Patwa 9. Ram Nath Patwa S/o Late Gauri Shankar Patwa Sl. No. 5 to 8 all residents of village and P.S. Khutauna, District - Madhubani. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amitesh Kumar, Advocate : Mr. Raghunath Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Raj Kishore Roy, GP-18 : Mr. Manish Kumar, AC to GP-10 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 2 02-12-2025 Heard the parties. 2. The present petition has been preferred for the grant of following relief(s): “for issuance of writ/writs, order/orders and/or direction/directions in nature of mandamus commanding the Respondents concerned Authority to receive rent of Khata No. 600, Khesra No. 4713 measuring an area 4 dhurs 10 ¾ Kanma of Mauza Khutauna, Revenue Thana Phulparas, Thana no. 90, District- Madhubani from the petitioner, who Patna High Court CWJC No.16416 of 2016(2) dt.02-12-2025 2/2 is sole owner of the aforesaid land over which his dwelling house is standing and further for direction to grant the Receipt in token there of and further to grant any other relief/reliefs to the petitioner to which the petitioner may be found entitled in law.” 3. A counter affidavit on behalf of the respondent no.1 to 4 has come after service of copy to the learned counsel for the petitioner on 30.06.2017 and as per paragraph no.15, the issues raised relates to title which can be resolved only before a competent Civil Court. 4. As recorded, the copy of the counter affidavit has been served in the year 2017, and there is no rebuttal to it. 5. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he shall be exploring appropriate remedy before a competent authority/court for the redressal of the grievance. 6. The State has no objection to it. 7. Granting said liberty, the writ petition is disposed of. vinayak/- (Rajiv Roy, J) U