Lalit Sahani v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9898 of 2018 ====================================================== 1.1. Ramsakhi Devi Wife of Late Lalit Sahani Resident of Village Govind Pitojhiya, P.S. - Runisaidpur, Distt. - Sitamarhi. 1.2. Soni Kumari D/o Late Lalit Sahani Resident of Village Govind Pitojhiya, P.S. - Runisaidpur, Distt. - Sitamarhi.

1.3. Niraj Kumar Son of Late Lalit Sahani, Resident of Village Govind Pitojhiya, P.S. - Runisaidpur, Distt. - Sitamarhi.

1.4. Vijay Kumar Son of Late Lalit Sahani, Resident of Village Govind Pitojhiya, P.S. - Runisaidpur, Distt. - Sitamarhi.

1.5. Dhiraj Kumar Son of Late Lalit Sahani, Resident of Village Govind Pitojhiya, P.S. - Runisaidpur, Distt. - Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through Secretary of Land and Revenue Department, Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Director of Fisheries Department Tirhut Commissionary Muzaffarpur. 3.

The Collector, Sitamarhi.

4.

The District Fisheries Officer-Cum-the Chief Executive officer, Sitamarhi. 5.

The Minister of Fisheries Department, P.S.Runisaidpur, District- Sitamarhi. 6.

The Circle Officer, Runisaidpur.

7.

Jitendra Prasad Singh Son of Shri Ram Khailawan Singh 8.

Chandeswar Prasad Singh Son of Mahabir Singh 9.

Ashawani Prasad Singh 10.

Ranjit Kumar Singh 11.

Ranjit Kumar Singh Father name Ganesh Prasad Singh 12.

Ajit Kumar Singh All respondent No. 7 to 11 residence of Village Govind Pitojhiya, P.S. Runisaidpur, District- Sitamarhi. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Devendra Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha (AC to SC-19) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 04-02-2025 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioners and Learned Counsel for the State.

Patna High Court CWJC No.9898 of 2018(7) dt.04-02-2025 2/2

2. The present writ petition has been filed in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities not to disturb the Jalkar settlement in favour of the petitioners earlier since 01.07.2017 to 30.06.2018 and further prayer has been made to take legal actions against the private respondents who have disturb the peaceful possession over the Jalkar during the period of settlement of the pond.

3. Learned Counsel for the State raised preliminary objection and submits that present writ petition has been filed raising disputes relating to the period of Jalkar i.e. from 01.07.2017 to 30.06.2018. Counsel submits that the said period has already been lapsed.

4. In this view of the matter, this writ petition is hereby dismissed as having become infructuous. (Dr. Anshuman, J) Divyansh/- U