Shyamanand Mandal And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11582 of 2017 ====================================================== 1.

Shyamanand Mandal Son of Late Moti Mandal 2.

Bhageshwar Mandal, Son of Late Moti Mandal 3.

Ambika Devi, Wife of Kapildeo Mandal All Resident of Village-Harmukhi, P.S.-Banmankhi, District-Purnea ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Member, Bihar Land Tribunal, Patna 3.

The Divisional Commissioner, Purnea 4.

The Land Reform Deputy Collector, Banmankh, District-Purnea 5.

Sudhistha Narayan Mandal, Son of Digambar Mandal, All Resident of Village-Harmukhi, P.S.-Banmankhi, District-Purnea ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, GP-14 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 17-06-2025 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner though the State is present.

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

"(i) To quash the order dated 05.09.2012 passed by Divisional Commissioner, Purnea in Land Dispute Appeal Case No. 68 of 2012 whereby the appeal filed by the Respondent No. 5 has been allowed and set aside the order dated 23.03.2012 passed by D.C.L.R., Banmankhi, Purnea in Case

Patna High Court CWJC No.11582 of 2017(3) dt.17-06-2025 2/2 No. 101 of 2011-12.

(ii) To quash the order dated 19.07.2016 passed by the Member, Bihar Land Tribunal, Patna in BLT Case No. 118 of 2016 whereby the BLT case filed by the petitioners has been dismissed.

(iii) To upheld the order dated 23.03.2012 passed by Deputy Collector Land Reform, Banmankhi in Case No. 101 of 2011-12."

3. Learned State counsel has taken this Court to the order of the learned Bihar Land Tribunal, Patna dated 19.07.2016 to show that a reasoned order has been passed rejecting the claim of the petitioner which was earlier negated by the learned Commissioner also.

4. Though there is force in the submission of the learned State counsel, since there is no appearance, the same is dismissed for non-prosecution.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Adnan/- U