Mahanth Karihar Pandit @ Ramchandra Das Saheb @ Ram Chandra Ram v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18285 of 2018 ====================================================== Mahanth Karihar Pandit @ Ramchandra Das Saheb @ Ram Chandra Ram, Mahanth of Village and P.O. Khajuri, P.S.-Koach, Distirct- Gaya, Mahanth of Sadguru Kavir Ashram Ratnar, Ganga Bigha 357 near Sarswti Mandir P.S.- Bodh Gaya, Distirct- Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Principal Secretary, Revenue and Lands Reform, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Distirct Magistrate, Gaya District-Gaya.

4.

The Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Gaya. 5.

The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Govt. of BIhar, Patna. 6.

The Circle Officer Bodh Gaya, Block, Distirct Gaya. 7.

Karan Paswan Son of Late Somar Paswan, Resident of Village-Artnara Ganga Bigha Coloney, P.S. Bodh Gaya, District Gaya. 8.

Lalan Paswan Son of Karu Paswan, Resident of Village-Ratnara, Ganga Bigha, P.S.-Bodh Gaya, Distirct-Gaya.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar No. 1 For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Sajid Salim Khan- SC25 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 12-04-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ application has been filed seeking a direction upon the respondents to restore the possession of the petitioner in Sadguru Kavir Ashram and to provide proper safety of his life and properties of the said Ashram, so that the Ashram can again be used for the welfare of poor landless, houseless

Patna High Court CWJC No.18285 of 2018(2) dt.12-04-2023 2/2 and needy persons.

The learned State counsel submits that the petitioner as per his own averments in the writ petition stands ousted from the Ashram, as such, the petitioner should move before the competent authority for redressal of his grievance for being reinstated in the Ashram and then to agitate, as the State Authorities cannot put the petitioner back in possession of the Ashram.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Court does not feel persuaded to proceed with the writ application in the nature of relief sought.

The writ petition is dismissed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/Adnan U