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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.209 of 2019 ====================================================== Smt. Munni Devi Wife of Ranjeet Mandal, resident of Mohalla Katari Police Station- Chandauti, District- Gaya.

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar and Ors through the Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The District Magistrate, Gaya.

3.

The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Gaya.

4.

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Law and Order, Gaya. 5.

The Circle Officer, Town (Gaya), Distsrict- Gaya. 6.

The Officer In-Charge, Chandauti Thana, Gaya. 7.

Ram Pravesh Yadav, Son of Late Babu Lal Yadav, resident of MohallaBaljori Bigha, Katari, Police Station- Chandauti, District- Gaya. 8.

Sachin Yadav, Son of Sri Sidheshwar Yadav, resident of Mohalla- Baljori Bigha, Katari, Police Station- Chandauti, District- Gaya. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Gauhar Ali For the Respondent/s :

Mr. S.K. Ghosarwe ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR) 10-11-2022 Heard Mr. Gauhar Ali, the learned Advocate for the appellant and Mr. S.K. Ghosarwe, the learned counsel for the State.

The appellant is a landlord of a shop in which the respondent nos. 7 and 8 were tenants, who were forcibly evicted and the shop was sealed at the instance

Patna High Court L.P.A No.209 of 2019(3) dt.10-11-2022 2/3 of the District Magistrate acting on the complaint of the appellant/landlord.

On the tenants having approached this Court against the sealing of the shop as it was unjustified in the absence of any notice to them or observance of due process of law in that regard, the learned Single Judge found the action of the District Magistrate to be completely bad in the eyes of law and directed for restoring the possession respondents (here in this appeal) of the shop in which they were tenants for a long time.

We have no reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge, who was absolutely justified in directing for restitution of the shop to the respondent nos. 7 and 8, who were lawfully continuing as tenants. If at all the landlord/ appellant had desired to evict his tenants, she had to undergo the rigors of the law for evicting them, had they been non-compliant with the terms of the agreement.

Patna High Court L.P.A No.209 of 2019(3) dt.10-11-2022 3/3 The appeal stands dismissed but without any order as to costs.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) ( Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) sunilkumar/- U