Pappu Kumar vs The State of Bihar — CWJC/6012/2026

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

Case disposed Next hearing 20-Apr-2026

CNR: BRHC010375732026

e-Filing Number

09-04-2026

Filing Number

CWJC/8290/2026

Filing Date

09-Apr-2026

Registration No

CWJC/6012/2026

Registration Date

18-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.Pappu Kumar

    Adv. Ghanshyam Choudhary,Mritunjay Kumar Singh,Mritunjay Kumar Singh, ,Mritunjay Kumar Singh

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The State of Bihar

  2. 2.The District Magistrate,

  3. 3.The Sub Divisional Magistrate,

  4. 4.The Circle Officer,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 04-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Rajiv RoyView PDF

    Case Summary: CWJC/6012/2026 The Patna High Court disposed of Pappu Kumar's writ petition seeking removal of an unauthorized public dirt road constructed on his private land in Darbhanga without proper authorization, map, or consent. The court allowed the petitioner to approach the District Collector (Respondent 2) for grievance redressal, with the Collector directed to pass a reasoned order in accordance with law, and both parties agreed to this approach. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 20-Apr-2026

    For Admission - Fresh Cases

  4. 09-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWJC/6012/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CWJC/6012/2026 The Patna High Court disposed of Pappu Kumar's writ petition seeking removal of an unauthorized public dirt road constructed on his private land in Darbhanga without proper authorization, map, or consent. The court allowed the petitioner to approach the District Collector (Respondent 2) for grievance redressal, with the Collector directed to pass a reasoned order in accordance with law, and both parties agreed to this approach. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case