Md. Kismat Ali And ANR v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14315 of 2017 ====================================================== 1.

Md. Kismat Ali and Anr Son of Sheikh Azia Resident of Village / Mohalla - Bari, P.O. - Singhiya, P.S. - Singhiya, District - Samastipur Bihar. 2.

Md. Ali Son of Md. Khalil Resident of Village/Mohalla - Bharihar, P.O. - Singhiya, P.S. - Singhiya, District - Samastipur Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Director, Deprtment of Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Commissioner, Samastipur, District - Samastipur Bihar. 4.

The Collector, Samastipur, District - Samastipur Bihar. 5.

The Land Settlement Officer-cum-Collector, Darbhanga, District - Director Bihar. null null 6.

The Assistant Land Settlement Officer, Land Acquisition Department, Darbhanga, District - Director ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vinay Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Rishi Raj Singh, SC-19 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 29-04-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The present writ petition has been preferred for the following relief(s):

"for issuance of appropriate writ order or direction in nature of mandamus commanding the Respondents to make entry in the Records of Rights (Khatiyan) in the light of the Order dated 19.07.2005 passed in Case No. 17471 of 1987 and Order dated 19.05.2002 passed in Case No. 10033 of 1987 by the

Patna High Court CWJC No.14315 of 2017(2) dt.29-04-2025 2/2 Land Settlement Officer, Darbhanga under Section 6 of the Bihar Tenancy Act."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that it will suffice that the representation before the Assistant Land Acquisition Officer, Headquarter, Darbhanga (Annexure-2) is disposed of as according to him, the same has not been taken to its logical conclusion.

4. Learned State counsel submits that it will be appropriate that they file a fresh petition if the same has not been taken to its logical conclusion.

5. Learned State counsel also submits that instead of Assistant Settlement Officer it should go to the Land Settlement Officer-cum-Collector, Samastipur.

6. In that background, the writ petition stands disposed of allowing the petitioners to prefer fresh petition before the respondent no. 4, the Land Settlement Officer-cum-Collector, Samastipur in next four weeks who shall be taking the matter to its logical conclusion in six months.

7. The writ petition stands disposed of.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Adnan/- U