Smt. Daymanti Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14365 of 2016 ====================================================== Smt. Daymanti Devi Wife of Late Sombay Koundlhya Village Koritha, P.S. Bikram, District at Patna Bihar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Principle Secretary, Department of Revenue Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The District Magistrate, Patna Bihar.

4.

The Additional District Magistrate Patna Bihar. 5.

The Land Acquisition Officer Patna Bihar.

6.

The Circle Officer, Bikram Patna Bihar.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the State :

Mrs. Nutan Sahay, AC to AAG-12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 29-07-2025 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner though the State is present.

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

"(i) For quashing the order vide Memo no. 08 LA dated 01.06.2015 (Annexure-4 of this writ application) passed by the respondent no.5, under which without giving proper opportunity of the show cause notice asked to the petitioner, the respondent no.5 who wrongly and illegally paid the acquired land compensation of an area 7 1⁄2 Decimal to the Plot no.742, Khata no 201 [Situated at Village Koritha, P.S Bikram District

Patna High Court CWJC No.14365 of 2016(2) dt.29-07-2025 2/2 at Patna] to the unauthorized person namely Dr Harish Chandra son of late Ramjivan Singh.

(ii) Petitioner seeks further direction to the respondent authority to the land acquired compensation of a total area 18/1⁄2 Decimal to the Plot no.742, Khata no.201 situated at Village Koritha, P.S Bikram District at Patna be paid to the petitioner.

(iii) And/Or for any other relief(s) for which the Petitioner may be found entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the present case."

3. Learned State counsel submits that the petitioner has grievance against unauthorized persons but none of them have been party respondents and as such, the petition is fit to be dismissed for non-joinder of necessary parties.

4. There is force in the submission of the learned State counsel.

5. Be that as it may, since there is no appearance, the writ petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution. (Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U