Bijay Kumar @ Ram Bijay Sharma @ Ram Bijay Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6770 of 2020 ====================================================== 1.
Bijay Kumar @ Ram Bijay Sharma @ Ram Bijay Singh Son of Prashuram Singh, resident of Village- Bhelawar, Police Station- Kako in the district of Jehanabad.
2.
Vinay Kumar, Son of Prashuram Singh, resident of Village- Bhelawar, Police Station- Kako in the district of Jehanabad. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2.
The Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
3.
The Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya.
4.
The Collector, Jehanabad.
5.
The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Jehanabad in the district of Jehanabad. 6.
The Circle Officer, Kako in the district of Jehanabad. 7.
Rajendra Mochi, Son of Late Doman Das, resident of Village- Chainpur, Police Station - Kako in the district of Jehanabad. The legal heir of purchaser Late Munakka Devi.
8.
Naresh Mochi, Son of Late Doman Das, resident of Village- Chainpur, Police Station - Kako in the district of Jehanabad. The legal heir of purchaser Late Munakka Devi.
9.
Suresh Mochi, Son of Late Doman Das, resident of Village- Chainpur, Police Station - Kako in the district of Jehanabad. The legal heir of purchaser Late Munakka Devi.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate For the State :
Md. Khursid Alam (Aag12) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
2. In view of the judgment in the case of Sudharkar Jha Vs. the State of Bihar & Ors. With analogous cases,
Patna High Court CWJC No.6770 of 2020(4) dt.16-07-2024 2/2 reported in 2023(6) BLJ 397, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw this writ application.
3. Permission is accorded.
4. Accordingly, the writ application is dismissed as withdrawn.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) vinayak/- U