← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/18739/2017disposed

Dhimali @ Jhimali Mandal v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2025-06-30Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18739 of 2017 ====================================================== Dhimali @ Jhimali Mandal Son of Late Hazari Mandal, Resident of VillageFulkia, P.S.- Ismilepur, District- Bhagalpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar and Ors 2.

The Commissioner, Bhagalpur Division, Bhagalpur. 3.

The District Magistrate, Bhagalpur.

4.

The D.C.L.R. Naugachhia, Bhagalpur.

5.

The Divisional Public Complain Redressal Officer, Naugachhia, Bhagalpur. 6.

The Circle Officer, Naugachhia, Bhagalpur.

7.

Pappu Yadav, Son of Late Triveni Yadav, 8.

Rupesh Yadav, Son of Late Triveni Yadav, 9.

Santosh Yadav, Son of Late Triveni Yadav, 10.

Sanjay Yadav, Son of Late Triveni Yadav, All resident of West Bhitta, P.S.- Ismilepur, District- Bhagalpur.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhirendra Singh, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Md. Khurshid Alam - Aag12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 30-06-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The present writ petition has been preferred: to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus for a direction to the official respondents to act in light of the order vide Gyapank No. 240 dated 16-4-2017 issued by the Circle Officer, Naugachhia, Bhagalpur (Respondent no. 6).

3. A counter affidavit on behalf of the respondent nos. 3, 4 and 6 duly signed by the Circle Officer, Ismailpur,

Patna High Court CWJC No.18739 of 2017(2) dt.30-06-2025 2/2 Bhagalpur is on record and paragraph 10 and 11 shows that the petitioner has no role to play in the aforesaid land in question and as per the reply, pursuant to the order of the 31.03.1981 passed in Misc. Case No. 14/79-80 by the Additional Collector (Land Ceiling), Bhagalpur, one Basant Yadav has been found to be in place.

4. The same has not been rebutted.

5. In that background, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since he also had parcha, liberty be granted to approach appropriate authority within the district.

6. Granting said liberty, the writ petition is disposed of.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U