Patna High CourtCWJC/7242/2014disposed

Savita Kuar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-01-28Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 7242 of 2014 =========================================================== Savita Kuar Wife of Late Gauri Shankar Singh, Resident of Village Jahanabad, Police Station Kudra, District - Kaimur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Collector, Kaimur, District Kaimur.

3. The Anchal Adhikari, Kudra, District Kamiur. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ram Ishwar Prasad, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Muzatubuddin Haque, G.P. 12 Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, A.C. to G.P. 12 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 28-01-2017 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner has moved the Court being aggrieved by the oral direction of the authorities to vacate the land in question on the ground that it has been recorded in the name of the State of Bihar in the Revisional Survey Khatian.

It appears that the petitioner is asserting right and title over the land on the basis of an order passed by the Consolidation Officer, Kudra, Rohtas dated 21.03.1984 with regard to MauzaJahanabad, Thana No. 657, Consolidation Case No. 118 / 1983-84 under Section 10(B) of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956. As per the stand of the authorities, the said order has been passed by the authority who has

Patna High Court CWJC No.7242 of 2014 dt.28-01-2017 2/2 acted beyond jurisdiction. In the supplementary counter affidavit filed it has been stated that Consolidation Appeal No. 65 of 2017-18 (The State of Bihar and others Vs. Savita Kuer) has been filed before the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Rohtas and Kaimur at Sasaram.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the substantial portion of the land has already been taken and boundary wall has been built by the Government.

Be that as it may, the petitioner is at liberty to contest the appeal filed by the State and if so required, move before the competent forum for redressal of her grievance in accordance with law.

The writ application stands disposed off.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) Anand Kr.

AFR/NAFR U