Md. Issa v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18092 of 2017 ====================================================== Md. Issa Son of Shekh Jholi Resident of Village- Dewka Tola Satasi, P.S. Nauhatta, District- Saharsa.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Secretary, Department of Revenue , Govt of Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Divisional Commissioner, Koshi Division, Saharsa. 4.

The Incharge Officer, Legal, Koshi Division, Saharsa. 5.

The District Magistrate, Saharsa.

6.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Saharsa.

7.

The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Saharsa Sadar. 8.

The circle Officer, Nauhatta, Saharsa.

9.

Pintu Mukhiya S/o late Yognedra Mukhiya Resident of Village- Dewka, P.S. Nauhatta, District Saharsa.

10.

Jagdish Yadav 11.

Ram Yadav 12.

Rajendra Yadav All Sons of Maharaj Yadav Residents of Village- Marbana Tola Sharba, P.S. Madhepur, District- Madhubani. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anant Kumar-1, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Dhurjati Prasad, GP-14 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 16-09-2025 Heard the parties.

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

(i) for a direction upon the respondents 2nd set not to disturb, interfere in peaceful possession and in cultivation of the land details of which given in Annexure-1 to the writ petition as the name is the purchased

Patna High Court CWJC No.18092 of 2017(2) dt.16-09-2025 2/2 land of the petitioner and the respondent 2nd set have no concern with the land to question;

(ii) for quashing the letter No.2843 dated 19.11.2016 issued by Incharge Officer, Legal, Koshi Division, Saharsa by which the No.1157 dated letter 4.11.2016 of D.C.L.R.

Saharsa has been stayed and further directed the Circle Officer, Nauhatta to comply the same;

(iii) for grant of any other relief/reliefs of which the petitioner may be found entitled under the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. Mr. Anant Kumar No.1, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for withdrawal of the petition.

4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U