Kanchan Kumari v. The State Of Bihar Through Mr. R.K. Mahajan The Principal Secretary, Land Reforms Department,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.75 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1750 of 2013 ====================================================== Kanchan Kumari W/o Shri Satyendra Prasad, Resident of Plot No.C/3, Suvidha Lok, Anand Vihar, Naya Tola (Talabpar), P.S. Agam Kuan, Dist.- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Mr. R.K. Mahajan the Principal Secretary, Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

Mr. Bajrant Kumar Chaudhary, The Registrar, Bihar Land Tribunal, Bihar, Patna 3.

Mr. Kumar Ravi, The Divisional Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna 4.

Dr. Chandrashekhar, The District Magistrate, Patna 5.

Mr. Raman Kumar Sinha, The Sub-Divisional Officer, Patna City, Patna 6.

Mr. Sheo Ranjan, The Land Reform Deputy Collector, Patna City, Patna 7.

Mr. Jitendra Pandey, The Circle Officer, Patna Sadar, Patna. 8.

Dr. Purushottam Singh S/o not known to the petitioner, Resident of Plot No.C/2, Suvidha Lok, Anand Vihar, Naya Tola (Talabpar),P .S. Agam Kuan, Dist.-Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Md. Khurshid Alam, AAG-12 For opposite party No.8 :

Mr. Mukul Kr. Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA ORAL ORDER 21-04-2025 This contempt petition has been filed alleging violation of the order dated 11.03.2014 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 1750 of 2013, wherein this Court had passed the following order:

"Let the private respondents obtain interim order in the pending BLT Case No.

153 of 2014 within six weeks from today.

Patna High Court MJC No.75 of 2019(6) dt.21-04-2025 2/2 The official respondents shall not proceed with the matter in the meanwhile for a period of six weeks from today. Upon expiry of the said period, if the respondents are unable to obtain any interim order then it will be open to the respondent-Circle Office to proceed with the matter for execution of order dated 13.3.2012 in accordance with law.

The application stands disposed of."

2. Although the direction passed in the writ petition appears to be not very categorical but on reading of the order it appears that the dispute between the parties is related to a land.

3. In that view of the matter, I am of the view that no case for contempt has been made out in the instant case and accordingly the contempt petition stands closed and disposed of with a liberty granted to the parties to take recourse to the appropriate remedy before the appropriate forum as may be permissible under the law for resolution of the dispute. (Nani Tagia, J) Narendra/- U