Ramanand Tiwary And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17929 of 2016 ====================================================== 1.

Ramanand Tiwary Son of Late Shankar Tiwary 2.

Yogendra Tiwary Son of Late Nagina Tiwary 3.

Anil Tiwary Son of Late Buni Tiwary All resident of village - Mangalpur Gudaria, P.S. Nautan, District - West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The District Collector, West Champaran, Bettiah 3.

The Additional Collector, West Champaran, Bettiah 4.

The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Bettiah, West Champaran 5.

The Circle officer, Nautan, District West Champaran, Bettiah 6.

The Circle Inspector, Nautan, District West Champaran, Bettiah ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jai Shankar Pathak, Advocate Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Dhurjati Kumar Prasad, G.P.-14 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 13-10-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The present petition has been preferred for the following relief/s:

(i) for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction to the Respondent authorities especially Respondent no. 5 the Circle Officer, Nautan, District West Champaran not to obstruct/disturb the peaceful possession of the petitioners from the land in question as well as for other relief/s for which the petitioner is entitled in the facts

Patna High Court CWJC No.17929 of 2016(9) dt.13-10-2025 2/2 and circumstances of the case.

3. Learned State counsel submits that pursuant to the order of the Patna High Court in C.W.J.C. No. 6491 of 2008, the Collector, West Champaran took up the matter and vide an order dated 26.08.2013 decided the same which is part of the counter affidavit as Annexure-D.

4. The State counsel, at the outset, submits that the same having not been challenged, has become final.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that so far the peaceful possession is concerned, in the counter affidavit, they have not disputed the same.

6. In that background, when both the parties do not have any grievance, neither the petitioners have challenged the order in question nor the State has denied the peaceful possession, this case has got no merit.

7. Any party, still aggrieved can knock the doors of a competent Civil Court.

8. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U