Md. Sahmad Miyan And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12630 of 2017 ====================================================== 1.
Md. Sahmad Miyan son of Late Tafaizul Miyan.
2.
Md. Sakim son of Late Md. Tafaizul Miyan.
3.
Md. Ibrahim son of Late Sumrit Miyan.
4.
Mohammad Miyan son of Late Sumrit Miyan.
5.
Md. Rasul son of Late Sumrit Miyan.
6.
Md. Kadir son of Late Safid Miyan. All resident of Village- Khaira Chanda, Post Office Chanda Khaira, Police Station Narpatganj, District- Araria. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State Of Bihar 2.
Shri K.P. Ramaiyah, the Member Administration, Bihar Land Tribunal, Patna.
3.
The Director of Consolidation, Bihar, Patna.
4.
The Joint Director of Consolidation, Bihar, Patna. 5.
The Deputy Development Commissioner, Araria.
6.
Gobardhan Yadav son of Late Fating Yadav, resident of Village- Chanda Khaira Thalaha Post Office and Police Station Narpatganj, District Araria. 7.
Md. Siddique.
8.
Md. Serajuddin.
9.
Md. Sahiddin. All sons of Late Maharaji Miyan. 10.
Md. Fida Husain, 11.
Md. Nabib Miyan.
12.
Md. Riyasat Miyan. All sons of Late Domi Miyan. All resident of Village, Post Office and Police Station- Khaira Chanda, Post Office Chanda Khaira, Police Station Narpatganj, District Araria.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ramesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Rishi Raj Sinha -SC-19 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 22-04-2025 Heard the parties.
2. The present writ petition has been preferred for the following relief(s):
2/4 "for quashing the order dated 03.08.2017 passed by Shri Κ.Ρ. Ramaih, the member Administration, Bihar Land Tribunal, Patna in Bihar Land Tribunal Case No. 385 of 2017 who has refused to entertain the application though the member administration had got the power to entertain the application according to the Bihar Land Tribunal Act, 2009 but unfortunately he has not accepted the grievance of the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner had filed the revision application before the Director of Consolidation, Bihar, Patna in Revision Case No. 66/17. It is stated that the jurisdiction have been divided into two parts, The Director Joint of Consolidation Bihar, Patna is to decide the case of the Districts Rohtas, Bhabua, Buxar, Bhojpur and Vaishali and the Director of Consolidation, Bihar, Patna is to decide the case of the rest of districts the of Bihar. The petitioner filed an urgent application before the Director of Consolidation, Bihar, Patna (who is sitting in Old Secretariat Building) has also refused for early hearing.
3/4 Thereafter the petitioner moved an application before the refused also who tribunal to consider the case of the petitioner. The petitioners pray that a direction may be issued to the Director of Consolidation, Bihar, Patna for fixing early date of hearing."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner wanted the Director of Consolidation, Bihar, Patna to hear the Revision Case No. 66 of 2017 which was pending there.
4. The Bihar Land Tribunal, Patna refused to entertain the case holding it to be premature.
5. Aggrieved, the present petition.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it will suffice that if his case pending before the Director, Consolidation is disposed of. He, however, submits that for the present, he is not in a position to submit whether the case is still pending or not.
7. Learned State counsel submits that if the same is pending, it will be disposed of.
8. As no reply is on record, the State is unable to inform about the present status of the case, in that background, this Court disposes of the petition observing that if the said case
4/4 is still pending before the Director, Consolidation, the same be disposed of immediately.
9. The present writ petition stands disposed of. (Rajiv Roy, J) Adnan/- U