Smt. Gayatri Devi And ANR v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18154 of 2017 ====================================================== 1.

Smt. Gayatri Devi and Anr Daughter of Late Hiralal Agrawal, Wife of Sri Umashankar Prasad, 2.

Ramesh Kumar, Son of Umashankar Prasad, Both resident of Chanpatiya Bazar, P.O.P.S.- Chanpatiya, Dist- West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar and Ors 2.

The Divisional Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur. 3.

Deputy Inspector, General of Police, Muzaffarpur Range, Muzaffarpur. 4.

The District Magistrate, West Champaran at Bettiah. 5.

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

The Circle Officer, Chanpatiya West Champaran. 7.

The Officer In-charge, Chanpatiya P.S. West Champaran. 8.

Amjad Ali @ Amjad Miyan, Son of Shekh Taiyab @ Taiyab Miyan, null 9.

Akhtari Begam, Wife of Maqbul, Both resident of Tikuliya, Station Road, Near Old High School, P.O.P.S.- Chanpatiya, Dist- West Champaran. 10.

Ramchandra Yadav, Son of Jokhu Yadav, Resident of village- Basantpur, P.O.- Shivpur, P.S.- Sathi, Dist- West Champaran. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Neeraj Kumar Gupta, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha -Sc19 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 17-06-2025 Heard the parties.

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

(i) For a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing and commanding upon the respondent authorities to get the delivery of possession in favour of the petitioners with respect to land measuring 3 katha 121⁄2 dhur

Patna High Court CWJC No.18154 of 2017(2) dt.17-06-2025 2/2 situated at Mauza- Tikuliya within P.O.+ P.S.- Chanpatiya in Dist- West Champaran appertaining to Khata No. 165 and Khesra No.

2156.

(ii) For a direction to the respondent authorities to evict the respondents nos. 8, 9 and 10 from the Land of the petitioners as the said land belongs to the petitioners and the private respondents have forcibly captured and grabbed the land of the petitioners and dispossessed them from their own land.

(iii) For a direction to the respondent authorities to restore the possession of the aforesaid land in favour of the petitioners who has been dispossessed forcibly by the private respondents in violation of the Fundamental Rights.

(iv) For any other relief/ reliefs to which the petitioners are found entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Neeraj Kumar Gupta prays for and is allowed to approach the Competent Authority for the redressal of the grievance.

4. The writ petition stands disposed of.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U