Mahesh Sah v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11141 of 2017 ====================================================== Mahesh Sah Son of Late Mithu Sah, Resident of Village- Joriyahi, Bel, P.S.- Bairgania, District- Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

Executive Engineer, Bagmati Pramandal, Sitamarhi. 3.

Rehabilitation Officer, Bagmati Project, Sitamarhi. 4.

Asharfi Sah, Son of Late Faguni Sah, 5.

Mostt Rajwati Devi, Widow of Chandu Sah, 6.

Babulal Sah, Son of Late Chandu Sah, 7.

Nandlal Sah, Son of Late Chandu Sah, 8.

Umesh Sah, Son of Late Chandu Sah, All resident of Village- Joriyahi Bel, P.S.- Bel, Distt- Sitamarhi.

9.

Snita Devi, Daughter of Late Chandu Sah, Wife of Shambhu Sah, Resident of Vill- Jamua, P.S.- Bairgania, Distt- Sitamarhi. 10.

Mahendra Sah, Son of Late Chhatu Sah, Resident of Village- Joriyahi, Bel, P.S.- Bel, District- Sitamarhi.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Swati Mishra, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Dhurjati Kr. Prasad, G.P.-14 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 23-06-2025 Heard the parties.

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

(i) an appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the order dated 7.6.2017 passed by the respondentExecutive Engineer as contained in Annexure-3 as well as the rehabilitation 'Purcha'

dated 15.6.2017 issued in favour of

Patna High Court CWJC No.11141 of 2017(3) dt.23-06-2025 2/2 respondents 2nd Party as contained in Annexure-4, be issued;

(ii) an appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents 2nd Party to forbear from effecting delivery of possession of the land in question to the respondents 2nd Party, be issued (iii) an appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents 2nd Party restraining them from interfering in any way with the petitioner's possession over the land mentioned in Annexures 3 and. 4, be issued.

3. Ms. Swati Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner in the presence of learned counsel for the State submits that she may be permitted to withdraw the petition.

4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U