Shekh Md. Samiullah @ Samiullah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3630 of 2024 ====================================================== Shekh Md. Samiullah @ Samiullah Son of Late Ali Hasan, resident of Village - Ward No. 05, Telpur, P.S. - Harinagar, District - West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Land and Revenue Department, Bihar.

2.

The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Narkatiyaganj, West Champaran. 3.

The Circle Officer, Lauriya, West Champaran.

4.

The Officer-in-charge, Harinagar, West Champaran. 5.

Md. Firoz, Son of Harun, resident of village- Ward No. - 05, Telpur, P.S. - Harinagar, District - West Champaran.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Suresh Prasad Sharma, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Standing Counsel (28) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 20-06-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: (i) to settle the land pertaining to Mauze-Telpur, Block-Lauriya, Khata No. 38, Plot No. 663, Area 6 1⁄2 Dhurs, where he is living with family including whole family;

(ii) to any other relief/reliefs for which the petitioner found to be entitled to.

Patna High Court CWJC No.3630 of 2024(2) dt.20-06-2024 2/2

3. According to the petitioner, the respondent no.5 has captured some piece of the land and the DCLR, Narkatiyaganj in Case No. 39/2012-13 had vide an order dated 13.8.2012 directed the Circle Officer, Lauriya to remove the encroachment which was not done by the Circle Officer.

4. Learned State Counsel points out that the order is of the year 2012 and lots of water has flown down in the ganges since then. The petitioner after 12 years wants compliance of said order relating to dispute between private parties.

5. This Court has gone through the order dated 13.8.2012 and accepts the submissions put forward by the State counsel. No plausible reason has been given in the writ petition for 12 years delay.

6. The writ petition is hopelessly time barred, the same is dismissed for delay and laches.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U