← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/6196/2025disposed

Shiv Shankar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2025-04-28Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6196 of 2025 ====================================================== Shiv Shankar Singh Son of Late Dharmu Singh Resident of Village-Paharpur, Police Station-Sheo Sagar, District-Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Bihar 2.

The Collector, Rohtas, Sasaram.

3.

The Superintendent of Police, Rohtas, Sasaram. 4.

The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sasaram District-Rohtas. 5.

The Circle Officer, Sheo Sagar, District-Rohtas. 6.

The Officer-in-Charge, Sheo Sagar Police Station, District-Rohtas. 7.

Shiv Parshan Singh Son of Late Sita Ram Singh Resident of VillagePaharpur Post Office-Baraila, Police Station-Sheo Sagar, District-Rohtas. 8.

Hari Narayan Singh Son of Shiv Parshan Singh Resident of VillagePaharpur Post Office-Baraila, Police Station-Sheo Sagar, District-Rohtas. 9.

Shambhu Singh Son of Shiv Parshan Singh Resident of Village-Paharpur Post Office-Baraila, Police Station-Sheo Sagar, District-Rohtas. 10.

Manjay Singh Son of Shiv Parshan Singh Resident of Village-Paharpur Post Office-Baraila, Police Station-Sheo Sagar, District-Rohtas. 11.

Vijay Singh Son of Late Shiv Pujan Singh Resident of Village-Paharpur Post Office-Baraila, Police Station-Sheo Sagar, District-Rohtas. 12.

Jay Shankar Singh Son of Late Shiv Pujan Singh Resident of VillagePaharpur Post Office-Baraila, Police Station-Sheo Sagar, District-Rohtas. 13.

Kalaktar Singh @ Satyendra Singh Son of Late Shiv Pujan Singh Resident of Village-Paharpur Post Office-Baraila, Police Station-Sheo Sagar, DistrictRohtas. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Surendra Kumar Choubey, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Government Pleader (20) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 28-04-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The present petition has been preferred for the following relief/s:

(i) for issuance of a writ in the nature of

2/4 writ of Mandamus directing the respondent authorities i.e. Circle officer Sheo Sagar and Officer-in-charge, Sheo Sagar to consider the application dated 27.1.2025 made by the petitioner and take an appropriate action/preventive action against the private respondent Nos 7 to 15 who are forcibly making bore well and installed the submersible pump in land of petitioner of Khata nos 26 plot no.349 area 33 decimal regarding the same Sub Divisional Magistrate has passed order dated 01.07.2022 in Case No. 46/2022 and ordered the private respondents to not interfere in the land of petitioner, unless the land has been allotted to them according to final decree of Title suit No.384/1999 (partition)'

(ii) issuance of a writ in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to comply the order dated 01.7.3022 passed in Case No. 46/2022 by the Divisional

3/4 Magistrate Sasaram, Rohtas;

(iii) issuance of a writ in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the respondent nos.

7 to 13 not to Interfere in the peaceful possession of the land of petitioner of Khata No. 26 Plot No. 349 area 33 decimal which is recorded in the name of Ram Briksh Singh (Grand father of petitioner);

(iv) issuance of any other appropriate writ(s) or order (s) or direction which may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the ease.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sasaram, Rohtas in Case No. 46 of 2022, once again the respondents are creating problem.

4. Learned State Counsel submits that in case he should have approached the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sasaram, Rohtas instead of Station Head Officer, Sheo Sagar, Rohtas.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he shall be approaching the concerned respondent (Sub-Divisional

4/4 Magistrate, Sasaram, Rohtas-respondent no.4).

6. If the said petition is filed after noticing the affected parties/respondent no.4, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sasaram, Rohtas is required to take an appropriate decision at an earliest considering the fact that the dispute is continue.

7. The writ petition stands disposed of.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U