Abhay Pratap Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3427 of 2025 ====================================================== Abhay Pratap Singh Son of Uday Pratap Singh, Resident of Ward no.- 12, Bhabua, P.S.- Bhabua, District-Kaimur at Bhabua. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Revenue, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2.

Collector cum District Magistrate, Kaimur.

3.

Circle Officer, Mohania, Dist.- Kaimur.

4.

Shailesh Giri, Son of Shri Surendra Giri, Resident of Village- Dadar, P.S.- Mohaniya, District- Kaimur at Bhabua.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Prabhakar Singh For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Government Pleader (14) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 18-03-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State.

2. The present writ application has been filed for quashing of the order dated 01-04-2024 passed in Miscellaneous Case No. 22 of 2024 by Respondent No. 2 by which, Wasika Kevala No. 8419 and 8422 dated 29-08-1989 was found to be void as it was executed without the permission of Consolidation Officer.

3. The petitioner is vendee of the land, in question, which is said to be purchased by the petitioner without obtaining prior permission of the Consolidation Authorities as required

Patna High Court CWJC No.3427 of 2025(2) dt.18-03-2025 2/2 under Section-5 of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to the "Act"). As per Section 32 of the Act, the transaction is void and the Collector may impose a fine for such transaction, not exceeding Rs. 250/- Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Collector has passed the impugned order after 35 years of the said transactions.

4. Be that as it may, the alternative remedy is available to the petitioner under Section 35 of the said Act. The petitioner, if so advised, may file revision before the Director (Consolidation) under Section 35 of the Act.

5.If the petitioner seeks the alternative remedy within a period of four weeks, the revisional authority shall decide the matter on merit without being prejudiced by this order within a period of six months from the date of approaching the authority.

6. With the aforesaid observations & directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) A.K.V.//- U