Binod Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12246 of 2017 ====================================================== Binod Kumar Singh Son of Late Sheo Pujan Singh, Resident of VillageNadokhar, Police Station- Kudra, District- Kaimur Bhabhua. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna.

3.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Mohania, Kaimur Bhabhua. 4.

The D.C.L.R., Mohania, Kaimur Bhabhua.

5.

The Anchal Adhikari, Kudra Kaimur.

6.

The Consolidation Officer, Kudra Kaimur.

7.

The Director of Consolidation, Bihar, Patna.

8.

The Managing Director Commercial, South Bihar Power Holding Distribution Company Limited, Vidyut B 9.

The Executive Engineer Planning Kudra Electricity of South Bihar Power Distribution Company Limite 10.

The Assistant Engineer Electricity Palnning Kudra of South Bihar Poswer Distribution Company Limit ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, GP-14 For the SBPDCL :

Mr. Ritesh Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 28-04-2025 Heard the parties.

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

"for quashing the procedure adopted by Respondent No. 5 in Land Transfer Case No. 1 of 2014-15 and its effects vide order dated 18.09.2014. The District Magistrate have passed

Patna High Court CWJC No.12246 of 2017(2) dt.28-04-2025 2/2 the gave consent and referred the matter before Commissioner and finally the Raiyati Lands have been settled in favour of South Bihar Power Holding Company Limited, Patna is declared illegal, arbitrary and malafide. Because for up holding the Right, Title, Interest and Possession of the petitioner over the land in question and petitioner are found entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the case. That is Annexure-7 in the writ petition."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Satish Kr. Singh submits that long before, the petitioner took no objection and there is nothing on record to show that anyone has subsequently appeared.

4. For want of prosecution, the writ petition stands dismissed.

(Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U