Nageshwar Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6446 of 2019 ====================================================== Nageshwar Prasad S/o Late Pragash Mahto Res. of Vill.- Dakhingaon, P.S.- Wazirganj, Distt.- Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Through the Collectors, Gaya. 2.

The Collector Gaya.

3.

The Additional Collector Gaya 4.

The Deputy Collector Land Reforms Sadar Gaya. 5.

The Circle Officer Wazirganj, Gaya.

6.

Vinod Kumar S/o Late Prabhu Mahto Res. of Vill.- Dakhingaon, P.S.- Wazirganj, Distt.- Gaya.

7.

Devanand Prasad S/o Late Prabhu Mahto Res. of Vill.- Dakhingaon, P.S.- Wazirganj, Distt.- Gaya.

8.

Amod Kumar S/o Late Prabhu Mahto Res. of Vill.- Dakhingaon, P.S.- Wazirganj, Distt.- Gaya.

9.

Upendra Kumar S/o Late Pramod Kumar Res. of Vill.- Dakhingaon, P.S.- Wazirganj, Distt.- Gaya.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mrs. Nivedita Nirvikar Mr.Manoj Kumar Ms. Sonakshi Mr. Manish Dhari Singh For the State :

Mr.Raj Kishore Roy ( Gp18 ) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 05-04-2019 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner has put to challenge an order dated 15.10.2018, passed by the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Sadar Gaya in Mutation Appeal Case No. 07 of 2018-19, whereby mutation in favour of respondent nos. 6 to 9 has been allowed and the order of the Circle Officer, Wazirganj in Mutation Case No. 2286 of 2012-

Patna High Court CWJC No.6446 of 2019(2) dt.05-04-2019 2/3 13 has been affirmed.

It transpires from the pleadings on record that the petitioner has assailed the said order dated 15.10.2018 by filing a revision application before the revisional authority, which is pending as Mutation Revision Case No. 73 of 2018-19 before the Additional Collector, Gaya.

Learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, after some arguments, has confined her prayer to the extent that the revisional authority, while disposing of the petitioner's revision case, must consider the points raised by the petitioner in his revision application. There is no gainsaying that the revisional authority has statutory duty to consider the points raised by the petitioner in his revision application, assailing the order of the Deputy Collector, Land Reforms dated 15.10.2018.

This writ application is accordingly disposed of with an observation that the revisional authority shall dispose of the revision case in accordance with law, in the light of the observation, as noted above. The Court also expects that the said revision application, which is

Patna High Court CWJC No.6446 of 2019(2) dt.05-04-2019 3/3 pending, is disposed of within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) HR/- U