Krishna Kumar Sinha v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1427 of 2016 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13618 of 2012 ====================================================== Krishna Kumar Sinha, Son of Late Rajeshwar Prasad, resident of VillageModkan, Police Station-Hussainganj, District-Siwan. ... ... Appellant
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Collector, Siwan.
2. The Collector, Siwan.
3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Sadar, Siwan.
4. The Circle Officer, Hussainganj, Siwan.
... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant :
Mr. Rakesh Kumar Shrivastava, Advocate For the Respondent State:
Mr. Ravish Chandra, AC to SC-6 For the Respondent/Intervener:
Mr. Aditya Narain Singh-I, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date : 28-11-2017 There is delay of 288 days in preferring the appeal. The reason given is that the appellant did not have adequate information about the order dated 18.08.2015 and that the appellant is a patient of coronary heart disease and he has been under treatment of his Doctors.
Looking at the date of the order and the time when the appeal has been preferred, there is no evidence to show that he was so bedridden or was confined to hospital where he was prevented from pursuing the appeal in question. The reason provided for delay, therefore, do not seem to be satisfactory and that is good enough ground for dismissal of the condonation application. I.A.
Patna High Court LPA No.1427 of 2016 dt.28-11-2017 2/2 No. 7287 of 2016 is accordingly dismissed. As a consequence thereof even the appeal is fit to be dismissed. Before parting, however, the Court would like to record that the matter was examined even from merit point of view. The submission of the counsel that in lieu of the private land, which he conceded in favour of the State to expand the road, he was permitted to occupy the Gair Majarua Aam land by the State authorities on oral agreement, is not substantiated by any surrounding or substantial evidence. It was in this background that the learned single Judge refused to buy the story and dismissed the writ application.
We are also not convinced with the story which is being sought to be passed of as a justification for encroachment of public land.
Appeal has no merit. It is dismissed otherwise also. I.A. No. 1947 of 2017 for intervention is rejected. (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) ( Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Pawan/- AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.
CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 28.11.2017 Transmission Date N/A