Pradip Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7493 of 2021 ====================================================== Pradip Kumar Son of Sri Yadav lal Prasad@ Yadolal Sah, Resident of VillageRamgarh, Mahuawa Tola, Watganj, P.S. Pipra Kothi, District- East Champaran, Motihari.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Addl. Chief Secretary, Revenue and Land Reform Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Addl. Chief Secretary, Revenue and Land Reform Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Collector/District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari. 4.

The Addl. Collector, East Champaran, Motihari. 5.

The Land Reform Deputy Collector, Chakia, District- East Champaran , Motihari.

6.

The Anchaladhikari, Chakia, District- East Champaran , Motihari. 7.

Bechi Devi, Wife of Rajkumar Sah, D/o Gokhul Sah, Resident of VillageChota Bariyarpur, P.O. Motihari, P.S. Chatni, District- East Champaran, Motihari.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sharda Nand Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Rishi Raj Sinha (Sc19) Mr Saurabh Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 10-10-2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Present writ petition has been filed for quashing order dated 19.8.2019 passed by respondent no.4 in Dakhil Kharij Revision Case No. 12 of 2017-18.

3. However, learned counsel for the State raises preliminary objection to the effect that an alternative remedy is available to the petitioner before the Bihar Land Tribunal for proper adjudication of the matter. He submits that liberty may

Patna High Court CWJC No.7493 of 2021(2) dt.10-10-2023 2/2 be given to the petitioner to approach the Bihar Land Tribunal.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the above proposition.

5. In the above view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter in its extra-ordinary writ jurisdiction. Let the petitioner file afresh application before the Bihar Land Tribunal for proper adjudication of the matter.

6. It goes without saying that if any question of limitation arises before the competent authority, the same shall be considered taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner was pursuing the issue before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

7. Writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashi/- U