Bigan Shah vs The State of Bihar

Court
Patna High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20288 of 2025
CNR No. BRHC011213852025
======================================================
Bigan Shah Son of Late Ramroop Shah, Resident of Village- Banua Tola
Konhi, P.O. and P.S.- Nauhatta, District- Rohtas (Bihar).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the District Collector, Rohtas at Sasaram.
2. Bachani Devi, W/o Late Murari Sah, Resident of village- Banua Toli Konhi,
P.O. and P.S. Nauhatta, District- Rohtas.
3. Parshuram Shah Son of Late Murari Sah, Resident of village- Banua Toli
Konhi, P.O. and P.S. Nauhatta, District- Rohtas.
4. Mangal Shah, Son of Late Ramdhani Shah, Resident of village- Banua Toli
Konhi, P.O. and P.S. Nauhatta, District- Rohtas.
5. Kamla Prasad, Son of Late Ramdhani Shah, Resident of village- Banua Toli
Konhi, P.O. and P.S. Nauhatta, District- Rohtas.
6. Uday Sah, Son of Late Ramdhani Shah, Resident of village- Banua Toli
Konhi, P.O. and P.S. Nauhatta, District- Rohtas.
7. Kunwar Devi, W/o Late Bijeshwar Shah, Resident of village- Banua Toli
Konhi, P.O. and P.S. Nauhatta, District- Rohtas.
8. Krishna Sah, Son of Late Bijeshwar Shah, Resident of village- Banua Toli
Konhi, P.O. and P.S. Nauhatta, District- Rohtas.
9. Baliram Sah, Son of Late Bijeshwar Shah, Resident of village- Banua Toli
Konhi, P.O. and P.S. Nauhatta, District- Rohtas.
10. Mukesh Sah, Son of Late Bijeshwar Shah, Resident of village- Banua Toli
Konhi, P.O. and P.S. Nauhatta, District- Rohtas.
11. Amerika Sah, Son of Bifan Sah, Resident of village- Banua Toli Konhi, P.O.
and P.S. Nauhatta, District- Rohtas.
12. Sudarshan Sah, Son of Bifan Sah, Resident of village- Banua Toli Konhi,
P.O. and P.S. Nauhatta, District- Rohtas.
13. Nawal Sah, Son of Bifan Sah, Resident of village- Banua Toli Konhi, P.O.
and P.S. Nauhatta, District- Rohtas.
14. Binod Sah, Son of Bifan Sah, Resident of village- Banua Toli Konhi, P.O.
and P.S. Nauhatta, District- Rohtas.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Smriti Kumari, Adv.
Mrs. Maya Shankar Mishra, Adv.
Mrs. Sneha Ranjan, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Bajarangi Lal, Adv.
Mr. Priya Ranjan Kumar, SC-23
Mr. Onkar Kumar, AC to SC-23

Patna High Court CWJC No.20288 of 2025 dt.02-11-2026
2/7

======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 02-11-2026
1. The present Writ petition has been filed
seeking issuance of a direction to the Members of
the Permanent Lok Adalat, Sasaram, Rohtas, to
modify the award dated 07.07.2011 passed in Case
No. 295 (D)/2010, in view of the statements made
in paragraph No. 4 of the compromise petition
dated 09.05.2011, filed by the concerned parties,
i.e., the petitioner as well as the respondents, by
incorporating Khata No. 69, Plot No. 271,
measuring an area of 1½ decimals, in Schedule-C
of the compromise, which was inadvertently left
out on account of a bona fide typographical
mistake, as it is the petitioner’s case that the
compromise petition is an integral part of the
award.
2. The brief facts, as culled out from the
Writ petition, are that the father of respondent Nos.
11 to 14 (the plaintiffs) filed Case No. 295 (D)/2010
before the Learned Permanent Lok Adalat, Rohtas,
Sasaram, on 14.09.2010, seeking a one-fourth (¼)

Patna High Court CWJC No.20288 of 2025 dt.02-11-2026
3/7
share in the land mentioned in Schedule-A of the
plaint, through partition by meets and bounds, with
the assistance of a survey-knowing advocate,
along with such other reliefs, to which the father of
respondent Nos. 11 to 14 might be found entitled.
In the said case, he impleaded the petitioner as
well as the ancestors of respondent Nos. 2 to 10 as
defendants.
3. The case of the father of respondent
Nos. 11 to 14, in brief, is that his ancestor, namely,
Javit Shah, had three sons, namely, (i) Ramroop
Shah, (ii) Ramcharitar Shah and (iii) Ramsundar
Shah. Ramsundar Shah died issueless, whereas
Ramroop Shah had four sons, i.e. defendant Nos. 1
to 4. The petitioners, Bifan Shah and Bigan Shah,
were impleaded as defendant Nos. 5 and 6,
respectively. The records further reveal that the
parties arrived at a compromise, pursuant to which
an award was passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat
in respect of the land in dispute between the
parties.
4. It is the specific contention of the

Patna High Court CWJC No.20288 of 2025 dt.02-11-2026
4/7
petitioner that, due to a typographical mistake on
the part of the typist, certain details relating to a
portion of the land were inadvertently omitted
from the award and, therefore, the present Writ
petition has been filed seeking incorporation of the
said details therein.
5. Heard the Learned counsel for the
petitioner as well as the Learned counsel for the
respondents.
6. The Learned counsel appearing on
behalf of respondent Nos. 2 to 13 contended that
the Permanent Lok Adalat has no jurisdiction to
review its own award and, therefore, no review
thereof can be undertaken, even if a mistake has
been committed in the award.
7. Having heard the rival submissions
advanced by the Learned counsel appearing for
both parties and upon perusal of the records, it is
evident that Section 22-A & 22-B of Chapter VI-A
deals with the definitions relevant to Permanent
Lok Adalats and its procedure.
8. Section 22-A and Section 22-B (1) reads

Patna High Court CWJC No.20288 of 2025 dt.02-11-2026
5/7
as follows:-
“22-A. Definitions.- In this
Chapter and for the purposes of sections 22
and 23, unless the context otherwise
requires,-
(a) "Permanent Lok Adalat"
means a Permanent Lok Adalat
established under sub-section (1) of
section 22-B;
(b) "public utility service"
means any-
(I) transport service for
the carriage of passengers or
goods by air, road or water; or
(ii) postal, telegraph or
telephone service; or
(iii) supply of power,
light or water to the public by
any establishment; or
(iv) system of public
conservancy or sanitation; or
(v) service in a
hospital or dispensary; or
(vi) insurance service;
and includes any service which
the Central Government or the State
Government, as the case may be, may,
in the public interest, by notification,
declare to be a public utility service for

Patna High Court CWJC No.20288 of 2025 dt.02-11-2026
6/7
the purposes of this Chapter.
22-B. Establishment of
Permanent Lok Adalats .
(1) Notwithstanding anything
contained in section 19, the Central
Authority or, as the case may be, every
State Authority shall, by notification,
establish Permanent Lok Adalats at such
places and for exercising such jurisdiction
in respect of one or more public utility
services and for such areas as may be
specified in the notification.”
9. Upon perusal of the aforesaid provisions
of Sections 22-A and 22-B (1) of the Legal Service
Authorities Act, 1987, it is evident that a
Permanent Lok Adalat is established for
adjudicating disputes pertaining to Public Utility
Services and it has no jurisdiction to record a
compromise in respect of a land dispute.
Therefore, the award dated 07.07.2011 passed by
the Permanent Lok Adalat, Sasaram, Rohtas, is
void ab initio.
10. In view of the above discussion, this
Court sets aside the award passed by the

Patna High Court CWJC No.20288 of 2025 dt.02-11-2026
7/7
Permanent Lok Adalat, Sasaram, Rohtas, dated
07.07.2011, with liberty to the parties, if so
intends, to approach the competent Civil Court for
recording their compromise or to file an application
before the District Legal Services Authority,
Sasaram, by way of a pre-litigation case for
recording the compromise.
11. With the aforesaid liberty, the Writ
petition stands disposed of.

(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J)
Aryan/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 04.11.2026.
Transmission Date N/A