Ramswaroop Manjhi @ Ramswaroop Bhuiyan vs The State of Bihar — CWJC/5407/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 04th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 09-Apr-2026

CNR: BRHC010166602026

e-Filing Number

12-02-2026

Filing Number

CWJC/3479/2026

Filing Date

12-Feb-2026

Registration No

CWJC/5407/2026

Registration Date

08-Apr-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy

Coram

Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

CIVIL WRIT ( 15 )

Sub-Category

OTHERS ( 6700 )

Judicial Branch

Judicial Section

Decision Date

04-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Ramswaroop Manjhi @ Ramswaroop Bhuiyan

    Adv. Pankaj Kumar,SONU KUMAR,SONU KUMAR, Niranjan Kumar,SONU KUMAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The State of Bihar

  2. 2.The District Magistrate,

  3. 3.The superintendent of Police,

  4. 4.The DySP Sheikhpura,

  5. 5.The Circle Officer Sheikhpura,

  6. 6.The officer in-charge Sheikhpura,

  7. 7.The Executive officer Nagar Parishad, Sheikhpura,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 04-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Rajiv RoyView PDF

    The court disposed of the writ petition with the observation that the concerned authority must hear both parties and pass an appropriate order before taking any action regarding the encroachment notice dated 18.11.2025. The petitioner, who claims 32 years of peaceful possession of land purchased via registered deed in 1992, was directed to file a reply to the notice, with the court emphasizing that procedural due process must be followed before any enforcement steps are taken. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Apr-2026

    For Orders (On Office Notes)

  4. 12-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWJC/5407/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court disposed of the writ petition with the observation that the concerned authority must hear both parties and pass an appropriate order before taking any action regarding the encroachment notice dated 18.11.2025. The petitioner, who claims 32 years of peaceful possession of land purchased via registered deed in 1992, was directed to file a reply to the notice, with the court emphasizing that procedural due process must be followed before any enforcement steps are taken. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case