← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/3340/2017disposed

Rama Nand Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2026-01-13Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3340 of 2017 ====================================================== Rama Nand Choudhary Son of Late Sheo Balak Choudhary, Resident of Village- Telkathu, Police Station- Mazharul Haque Nagar, District- Siwan. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar.

2.

The Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The District Collector, Siwan.

4.

The Additional Collector, Siwan.

5.

The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Siwan.

6.

The Circle Officer Husainganj, District- Siwan. 7.

Sheonath Choudhary, Son of Bodhi Choudhary, Resident of VillageTelkathu, Police Station- Mazharul Haque Nagar, District- Siwan. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhirendra Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Dhurjati Kr. Prasad, GP-14 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 13-01-2026 Heard the parties.

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

"i. For setting aside order dated 15.12.16 passed in Revision (land ceiling Preemption) Case no 109/2005 passed by Mr. K.K. Pathak I.A.S, Additional Member Board of Revenue, Bihar Patna, whereby and where under dismissed the revision petition of the petitioner observing that revision petition is not

Patna High Court CWJC No.3340 of 2017(2) dt.13-01-2026 2/2 maintainable.

ii. For setting aside the order dated 10.4.2005 passed in Pre-emption Appeal no 412 of 2012 passed by Collector Siwan where by affirm the order dated 3.8.2002 passed b DCLR Siwan in Pre-emption case no 34/2000-2001.

iii. For any other relief reliefs for which the petitioner may be found entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the case."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that with the change of law relating to pre-emption matter, the case has become infructuous.

4. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of as infructuous.

5. The statutory amount, if deposited, has to be returned.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Adnan/- U