Pardeep Kumar Mishra v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5054 of 2024 ====================================================== 1.

Pardeep Kumar Mishra Son of Late Chandra Shekhar Mishra Resident of Village Patuaha, P.S. and District - Saharsa. 2.

Ashok Kumar Mishra Son of late Chandra Shekhar Mishra Resident of Village-Patuaha, P.S. and District - Saharsa. 3.

Laxmi Devi wife of Late Dilip Kumar Mishra, resident of Village - Patuaha, P.S. and District- Saharsa.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Through the Chief Secretary, Old Secretariat, Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Principal Secretary, Registration, Excise and Prohibition Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Commissioner, Koshi Division, Saharsa.

4.

The District Magistrate, Saharsa.

5.

The Additional Collector, Saharsa.

6.

The Registrar District Registration office, Saharsa. 7.

The District Sub-Registrar, Saharsa.

8.

The Circle Inspector, Sattar Kataiya, District - Saharsa. 9.

Vijay Kumar son of Parmeshwari Yadav resident of Village Baijnathpatti, Tola - Baluaha, P.S. and District - Saharsa.

10.

Ajay Kumar Amar son of Parmeshwari Yadav resident of Village - Baijnathpatti, Tola - Baluaha, P.S. and District Saharsa. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Amarnath Jha For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Standing Counsel (8) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 20-06-2024 The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:- 1(i). For issuance of an appropriate writ directing the respondents for removal of the land bearing Khata No. 47 plot No. 1332 in Mauja Baijnathpatti, Tauji No. 5026, Thana No. 184

Patna High Court CWJC No.5054 of 2024(2) dt.20-06-2024 2/2 Anchal Sattar Kataiya District - Saharsa from the Restriction Register (Rock Suchi) of Registration Department of Government of Bihar.

(ii). For direction upon the respondents to register the sale deed as contained in Annexure -1 executed by the petitioners in favour of Respondent No. 9, 10 as there is no dispute in the land."

2.

The learned counsel for the petitioners seeks to withdraw the present writ petition, to which the learned counsel appearing for the State has got no objection.

3.

Accordingly, the present writ petition stands dismissed as not pressed.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Ajay/- U