Jai Prakash Sharma v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20259 of 2016 ====================================================== Jai Prakash Sharma son of Late Sahdeo Sharma, Resident of Village- Fulout East, P.S.- Chaudasa, Dist- Madhepura.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar and Ors 2.

The Collector, Madhepura.

3.

The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Udakishunganj, Madhepura. 4.

The Deputy Director Land Reforms, Udakishunganj, Distt- Madhepura. 5.

The Circle Officer, Chausa Anchal, P.S.- Chousa, Dist- Madhepura. 6.

The S.H.O., Chousa Police Station, Madhepura. 7.

Kailash Sah, son of Sahdeo Sah, Resident of Village- Fulout East, P.S.- Chausa, Dist- Madhepura.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Ghosarvey, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Sajid Salim Khan-Sc25 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 25-08-2025 Heard Ms. Richa Mohan, learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. The present writ petition has been preferred for the following relief(s):

for issuance of an appropriate writ or writs preferably in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the order dated 30.06.2016 contained in Annexure-1 passed by the Member Administrative, Bihar Land Tribunal, Patna in B.L.T. Case No.926 whereby and where under the Hon'ble Bihar Land Tribunal, Patna has remanded the

Patna High Court CWJC No.20259 of 2016(2) dt.25-08-2025 2/2 mater before the Divisional Commissioner, Saharsa for further action. The Hon'ble Tribunal has come to a wrong conclusion that under the Land Dispute Resolution Act, the appeal against the order of the Collector of the District is not lie with the Bihar Land Tribunal. Under the provisions, it should be from DCLR to the Divisional Commissioner.

The order of the Collector is from the direction of the Hon'ble High Court, if any grievances is there against the order shall be appealable before the Divisional Commissioner, Saharsa therefore the case has been remanded to the Divisional Commissioner, Saharsa for further action.

3. On instruction, the submission is that the parties have compromised and as such, she may be permitted to withdraw the petition.

4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U