← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/4410/2022dismissed

Rita Devi v. The State Of Bihar

2022-12-05Mr. Justice Mohit Kumar Shah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4410 of 2022 ====================================================== Rita Devi Wife of Sharda Sah, resident of Village- Rajepur, Pokhara, P.S. - Sangrampur, District - East Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The District Collector - Cum-District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari. 4.

The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Areraj, East Champaran. 5.

The Circle Officer, Circle Sangrampur, East Champaran. 6.

The Circle Amin, Sangrampur, East Champaran.

7.

The Circle Officer, Circle, Areraj, East Champaran. 8.

The Officer in-charge P.S. - Sangrampur, East Champaran. 9.

Fulena Sahni Wife of Sri Bhagwan Sahni, resident of Village - Rajepur Pokhra, Police Station- Sangrampur, District - East Champaran. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Subodh Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Md. Khurshid Alam ( AAG 12 ) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 05-12-2022 Though the present writ petition was filed for directing the Circle Officer, Sangrampur, East Champaran to conclude the proceedings of the Encroachment case no. 29 of 2018-19 and remove the encroachment in question, however, on the last occasion, the learned counsel for the petitioner had submitted that though the encroachment in question had been removed earlier but the same has again re-surfaced. Today, the learned counsel for the respondent State

Patna High Court CWJC No.4410 of 2022(3) dt.05-12-2022 2/2 has filed a counter affidavit, which is taken on record, wherein it has been stated that the encroachment, which had re-surfaced, has been removed and action has been taken against the erring officials, a fact which has not been disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

In such view of the matter, the present writ petition stands dismissed as not pressed.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) rinkee/- U