Giraja Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6932 of 2018 ====================================================== Giraja Devi, wife of Nageshwar Sah, resident of Village- Bagahi, P.O. Bagahi Ratanpur, P.S.- Bairiya, District West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Collector, West Champaran at Bettiah.

3.

The Additional Collector, West Champaran at Bettiah. 4.

The Sub Divisional Officer, Bettiah, West Champaran. 5.

The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Bettiah West Champaran. 6.

The Anchal Adhikari, Bairiya Anchal, West Champaran. 7.

The Manager, Bettiah Raj, Bettiah, West Champaran. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Aditya Nath Jha, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, GP-14 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 08-08-2024 Heard the parties.

2. The writ petition is based on the apprehension of the petitioner that the land in question appertaining to Khata No. 7, Khesra No. 1857, area of 12 dhur situated in village Bagahi of Bairiya Anchal settled by Bettiah Raj in favour of Thag Kanu, son of Bauk Kanu, who happens to be grand-father of the petitioner's mother, might be settled the land in favour of different persons in collusion with the State officials.

3. Having gone through the pleadings, this Court does not find any notice or document suggesting that any proceeding

Patna High Court CWJC No.6932 of 2018(2) dt.08-08-2024 2/2 has been initiated either for settlement of the land in question or the proceeding for dispossessing the petitioner from the said land. Apprehension of the petitioner appears to be unfounded. The writ petition was filed way back in the year 2018 and till date the petitioner has been coming in her peaceful possession.

4. Though a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents no. 2 to 6, this Court will not look into the averments made therein, as the case of the petitioner is based on only on apprehension of dispossession or settlement the land in question in favour of other persons.

5. The writ petition stands dismissed.

6. Needless to observe that in case situation arises and the possession of the petitioner shall be put under any threat, she has always a remedy to approach before the concerned authority/Court.

(Harish Kumar, J) rohit/- U