Gita Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3200 of 2017 ====================================================== Gita Devi D/o late Ram Krishna Vaidya Resident of Village- Bhagahar, P.S.- Imamganj, District- Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar and Ors 2.

The Circle Officer, Imamganj, Gaya.

3.

The S.P. Rural , Gaya.

4.

The Dy. S.P. Imamganj, Gaya.

5.

The Officer-in-Charge, Imamganj, Gaya.

6.

Sri Sheokumar Sharma S/o late Ramjatan Vaidya Resident of VillageBhagahar, P.S.- Imamganj, District- Gaya. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dineshwar Mishra, Adv.

Ms.Ruchi Arya, Adv.

For the State Respondent:

Mr.Birendra Prasad Singh, AC to SC-19 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 21-01-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition for the following relief(s):- (i) for issuance of appropriate writ(s), order(s) or direction commanding the concerned Respondents authority to prevent the Respondent No. 6 not to create any nuisance with regard to the purchased land of the father of the petitioner vide different registered sale deeds and after purchasing the same by the father of the petitioner the land has already been duly mutated in his favour and after his death, the petitioner being the only daughter, the right title, interest and possession exclusively vested in her and accordingly the land was

Patna High Court CWJC No.3200 of 2017(4) dt.21-01-2025 2/2 mutated in her favour and the rent receipts are being issued in her favour, but in order to derive illegal gain and to grab the land of the petitioner as well, the Respondent No. 6 is creating hindrance and causing nuisance for which the petitioner has already approached the competent authority but her grievance has not yet been redressed and the authority respondents are sitting tight over the matter, as such the act of the Respondents is illegal, erroneous and unjust and the same is causing serious prejudice to the petitioner.

3. As per submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the sale deed was executed in favour of her father and after death of her father, she inherited the property.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No. 6 should be restrained from interfering with the possession of the petitioner.

5. The writ petition stands disposed of with the observation that the petitioner may take recourse of civil remedy.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) kundan/- U