IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9366 of 2018 ====================================================== Rambabu Singh Son of Ramautar Singh, Resident of Village- Godhiya, Ward No. 1, P.S.- Bathanaha, District- Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Sitamarhi. 3. The Additional Collector, Sitamarhi. 4. The D.C.L.R., Land Reform, Sitamarhi Sadar. 5. The Block Development officer, Bathanaha. 6. The Circle Officer, Bathnaha. 7. The Halka Karmchari, Gram Panchayat Raj Harpur Bhalha, Bathnaha. 8. Mukhiya, Panchayat Raj Harpur, Bhalha Bathnaha. 9. Upendra Rai, Son of Chandeshwar Rai, residence of Village Harpur Bhalaha Tola Godhiya, Distt.- Sitamarhi. 10. Kailash Rai, son of Chandeshwar Rai, residence of Village Harpur Bhalaha Tola Godhiya, Distt.- Sitamarhi. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Devendra Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, GP-14 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 3 16-02-2026 Heard Mr. Devendra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, learned GP-14 representing the State. 2. The present petition has been preferred for the grant of following relief(s): “for issuance of writ in nature of mandamus and directing and commanding the respondent authorities for setting aside order dated 21.01.2003 and 13.02.2003, 13.03.2003 and 25.03.2003 respectively passed by Patna High Court CWJC No.9366 of 2018(3) dt.16-02-2026 2/2 consequential order by Circle Officer, Bathanaha in Bandobasti Case No. 4/2003-04 whereby and where under mentioned in appertaining Khata No. 1575 Plot No. 99 are 0.08 dec. which is Bihar Sarkar. Justi beside north the side. The petitioner lived at their residential house. The private respondents have also make house thereon infront of Bihar Sarkar land appertaining Khata No. 1575 Plot No. 99 and illegally Bandobasti in favour of Upen Upendra Rai son of Chandeshwar Rai and Kailash Rai son of Chandeshwar Rai.” 3. After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner shall be taking all the points before appropriate revenue authority to show that the respondents are also not landless person. 4. Granting said liberty and without commenting on the merit of the case, the writ petition is disposed of. vinayak/- (Rajiv Roy, J) U