Sri Baidyanath Rai v. Bihar Land Tribunal Patna And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.961 of 2016 ====================================================== Sri Baidyanath Rai Son of Late Biro Rai, Resident of Village- Kharagpur, P.S.- Nayagoan, P.O- Gorgama, District- Begusarai. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

Bihar Land Tribunal Patna 2.

The Divisional Commissioner, Munger Division, Munger. 3.

The Collector, Begusarai.

4.

The DCLR-cum-Collector Under the Ceiling Act, Begusarai. 5.

Sri Geeta Prasad Singh, S/O Late Ram Padarath Singh, Resident of VillageGorgama, P.O.- Gorgama, P.S.- Nayagoan, District- Begusarai. 6.

Shakuntala Devi, W/o Late Shiv Shankar Rai.

7.

Rabindra Kumar.

8.

Dev Kumar.

9.

Anil Kumar.

10.

Shambhu Kumar Rai.

11.

Manmohan Kumar.

12.

Deepak Kumar.

13.

Mukesh Kumar. All are son of Late Shiv Shankar Rai From Respondent no. 6 to 13 are Resident of Village- Kharagpur, P.S- Nayagoan, DistrictBegusarai. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Binod Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Arvind Kumar, AC to GP-23 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 21-07-2025 Heard the parties.

2.The present petition has been preferred for the following relief/s:

(i) for quashing common order dated 30.10.2015 passed in BLT Case No.

578/2015 which was heard along with BLT

Patna High Court CWJC No.961 of 2016(3) dt.21-07-2025 2/2 Case No. 579/2015 by the Chairman, Bihar Land Tribunal Patna whereby and where under impugned order dated 25.03.2015 passed by Divisional Commissioner, Munger in Ceiling Revision No. 366/2013, the order dated 07.09.2013 passed by Collector Begusarai in Ceiling Appeal No. 06/2012 as well as the order dated 02.03.2012 passed by DCLR, Begusarai in Ceiling Case No.

07/2011-2012 is set aside.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be permitted to withdraw the petition as it has become infructuous.

4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U