Baban Ram v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6203 of 2017 ====================================================== Amarnath Ram, S/o Late Babban Ram, Resident of Village Pawani, Pauri, Post Chunni, P.S. Chausa, District- Buxar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

The Collector, Buxar.

3.

The Anchal Adhikari, Chausa, district Buxar.

4.

Mahendra Ram son of Late Jamuna Ram 5.

Chandra Shekhar Ram son of Late Jamuna Ram 6.

Sushila Devi wife of Mahendra Ram 7.

Krishna Bihari Ram son of Late Sahaduli Ram null 8.

Karpuri Ram son of Late Sahaduli Ram null 9.

Gurucharan Ram son of Late Aaslok Ram null 10.

Premshila Devi wife of Hari Shankar Ram 11.

Jagnarayan Ram son of Late Sudarshan Ram All residents of village Pawani, p.s. Buxar Mu, post Chunni, Anchal Chausa, district Buxar. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Hemendra Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Rishi Raj Sinha, SC-19 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 05-12-2024 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. In the instant petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of an appropriate writ or writs for quashing the Basgit Parcha granted in favour of the private respondents on 03.01.2008 in Basgit Parcha Settlement Case Nos.1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6/07-08 and 27/11-12 by Respondent No.3, the Anchal Adhikari, Chausa, District-Buxar.

Patna High Court CWJC No.6203 of 2017(4) dt.05-12-2024 2/2

3. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that during the proceeding of this writ petition, Respondent No.2, the District Magistrate in Case No.14 of 2015 passed an order dated 02.09.2022 whereby the impugned order dated 03.01.2008 passed by respondent No.3 has been upheld which required to be challenged by the petitioner. He further submits that this case may be disposed of with liberty to petitioner to challenge the said order dated 02.09.2022 passed by the said Authority, in accordance with law.

4. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to this prayer of the petitioner.

5. In view of the submission of learned senior counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition stands disposed of with liberty to petitioner, as prayed for.

(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J) ashishkr/- U