Patna High CourtCWJC/17258/2016disposed

Sakuntala Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-11-25Mr. Justice Dr. Ravi Ranjan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 17258 of 2016 =================================================== Sakuntala Devi, Wife of Madan Das resident of Village- Gajaragadh, P.O.+P.S.+Anchal- Barachatti, District- Gaya. .... .... Petitioner.

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. The District Magistrate-cum-District Officer, Gaya.

5. The Sub Divisional Officer, Sherghatti, Gaya.

6. The Circle Officer, Barachatti, District- Gaya.

7. Samta Devi, Wife of Nawal Kishore Lal presently member of Bihar Legislative Assembly under Barchatti Legislature, Bihar, Patna.

8. Nawal Kishore Lala, Son of Banwari Lal Both are residents of Village- Gajaragadh, P.O.+P.S.+Anchal- Barachatti, District- Gaya. .... .... Respondents.

=================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Birendra Kumar Singh, Adv. For the Respondents: Mr. Rishi Raj Sinha-SC19 : Mr. Avanindra Kumar Jha, AC to SC-19 =================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 25-11-2016 Hear parties.

Petitioner seeks direction to the respondent authorities under Section 22 of the Bihar Bhoodan Yagna Act, 1954 for removal of encroachment of public land from Khata No. 188/66, Plot No. 7/22, i.e., Plot No. 1 (New), Khata No. 191 (New) of village- Garajgarh, P.S. Barahi, District-Gaya, by invoking the jurisdiction of the Circle Officer under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act.

Patna High Court CWJC No.17258 of 2016 dt.25-11-2016 Accordingly, this writ petition is being disposed of with such liberty. If the petitioner files such application before the respondent authorities, the same shall be considered on its own merit and in accordance with law. Such proceedings should be brought to its logical conclusion after granting reasonable opportunity to all the concerned including the private respondents expeditiously and preferably within a period of six months.

However, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed or formed any opinion on merit of the case. Vikash/- (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.) AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 03.03.2017 Transmission Date NA