In Guleshwar Yadav vs. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Bihar Land Reforms, Bihar & Ors. (2025), Patna High Court's Division Bench of Chief Justice Vipul M. Pancholi and Justice Partha Sarthy passed a 4-page long judgment dated August 4, 2025 disposed the writ application. This judgement was authored by Justice Partha Sarthy.
The petitioner had filed the application for the following relief(s):
(i) For issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quash the abatement order dated May 28, 2019 and the Respondents authority to declaring ultra virus Bihar Act 6, 2019 by which amendment has been brought in Section 16 sub section 3 of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 Amendment Act, 2019.
(ii) For direction to the Respondent Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Jamui to proceed with the proceeding of 4 of 2017-18 and considering the same not affected by amendment of Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Amendment Act, 2019.
The case of the petitioner was that a registered sale deed bearing no.187 dated January 8, 2018 was executed with respect to the land in question by Meera Devi, Saroj Mandal and Niranjan Mandal, the respondent nos.7 to 9 respectively in favour of Pramila Devi @ Sabiya Devi, the respondent no.10. The petitioner being a boundary raiyat of the land in question filed an application under section 16(3) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 for a direction to the respondent no.10 to transfer the land in his favour. The case was registered as Ceiling Case No.4 of 2018 in the Court of the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Jamui. During pendency of the this application, the Government of Bihar came out with the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) (Amendment) Act, 2019 whereby section 16(3) of the Act was repealed. As a result, by order dated May 28, 2019, the D.C.L.R., Jamui was closed the Ceiling Case no.4 of 2018 as having abated. As a consequence, the petitioner filed the application in the High Court for quashing the order of D.C.L.R., to declare the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) (Amendment) Act, 2019 as ultra vires and to direct the D.C.L.R., Jamui to proceed with the Ceiling Case no.4 of 2017-18.
The petitioner's case was that the validity of the Amendment Act, 2019 along with that of the Amendment Act, 2016 came for consideration and a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Sudhakar Jha & Ors. vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. [2023 (6) BLJ 397] which upheld the same vide its judgment dated October 13, 2023. The question of validity of the Amendment Act, 2019 was raised in the application having already been upheld in the case of Sudhakar Jha & Ors., nothing remains to be adjudicated and the instant application be also decided in similar terms.
Justice Parta Sarthy observed: "7. As already directed in the order dated 28.5.2019, it shall be open to the petitioner/pre-emptor to withdraw the amount deposited by him in terms of section 16 of the Act in accordance with law."
As part of the same Division Bench, Justice Sarthy had passed a similar judgement dated August 21, 2024 in Narendra Kumar @ Sanjeev Kr. Sinha vs. he State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Dept. of Revenue, Government of Bihar & Ors. (2024). He also observed: "in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Punyadeo Sharma & Ors. vs. Kamla Devi & Ors. [2022 (1) BLJ 434 (SC)] it held that all cases or proceedings which may be pending before any authority or Court including the High Court stood abated and the amount deposited shall be refunded in the manner as provided under section 16(4) of the Act."
Narendra Kumar @ Sanjeev Kr. Sinha, the petitioner had filed the writ application for the following reliefs :-“1. A. A writ in the nature of MANDAMUS or other appropriate writ/s, order/s, Respondents for the following:-i. To hold the provisions of the the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land (Amendment) Act, 2019 repealing sub-section 3 of Section 16 of the Act and adding now Sub-section 4(i)(ii) to be ultra-vires of the Constitution and in alternative to hold the amendment to be prospective in application and the same not to affect concluded orders/proceeding.
ii. To direct the private Respondents to execute Sale Deeds with respect to land bearing Khata No. 179 Plot No. 1221 admeasuring 28 decimal situated at village Mohamadpur gram panchayat Block Asthama P.S.-Asthama, District- Nalanda as covered by the Sale Deeds executed in favour of the Respondent No. 7 and 8 admeasuring 14 decimals situated at village Sherpur, falling within Mohammadpur Gram Panchayat at Asthama Block.
iii. To direct the Respondents to resort to the provisions of compulsory registration by concerned officials who are competent to execute the Sale Deed.
iv. To hold the Petitioner to be entitled to execution of the sale deed.
B. A writ in the nature of CERTIORARI or any other appropriate writ/s, order/s, direction quashing the following:-i. The order dated November 5, 2018 passed by the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Biharsharif in Land Celling Case No. 02/1983-84 rejecting the application filed by the Petitioner for execution of the Sale Deed.
ii. The order dated September 3, 2019 issued by the Additional Collector, Nalanda in Land Ceiling Appeal Case No. 04/2018 rejecting the appeal, filed by the Petitioner and terminating entire proceeding in view of the repeal of the provision contained in Section 16(3) of Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Lard) Act, 1961.
In this case also Justice Sarthy recalled that the constitutional validity of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) (Amendment) Act, 2019, besides other amendments, repealing section 16(3) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 was the subject matter of challenge in the case of Sudhakar Jha & Ors. vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. [2024 (3) PLJR 403 (DB)] wherein a Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the challenge to its constitutional validity. He concluded:"...this case arising out of an application under section 16(3) of the Act stands abated. It shall be open to the petitioner to withdraw the amount deposited by him in terms of section 16 of the Act in accordance with law. 4. The application stands disposed of as having abated."
