Manoj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10019 of 2021 ====================================================== Manoj Kumar Son of Late Hari Mohan Poddar Resident of Village- Kolhua Paigamberpur (New Police Line), P.S.- Ahiyapur, District- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through its Additional Chief Secretary, The Department of Revenue Land Reform, Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. 2.

The Collector, Muzaffarpur.

3.

Circle Officer, Kanti, Muzaffarpur.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Gajendra Prasad Yadav For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Raj Kishore Roy (Gp18) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-12-2023 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This writ application has been filed for the following reliefs:- (i) To direct the concerned respondents to create new Jamabandi and to issue fresh rent receipt of the land in question bearing Plot No. 4101 (New), Khata No. 1309 (New), Area 5 decimal, Mauza- Paigamberpur-Kolhua, Thana No. 482, Anchal- Kanti, District- Muzafferpur which was settled on 15.07.1945 by Ex-landlord in favour of Arsi Sonar, the grand father of the petitioner getting due Malguzari Rent, upon which the old residential house of the petitioner is situated peacefully from the very beginning to present time.

(ii) To direct respondent authorities to dispose of the representations vide Annexure-2 and Annexure-6 of the writ

Patna High Court CWJC No.10019 of 2021(4) dt.12-12-2023 2/2 petition.

3. In view of the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Collector, Muzaffarpur (Respondent No. 2) with all the necessary documents in his support within a period of six weeks from today.

4. In the event such representation is filed within the stipulated time frame, Respondent No. 2 is directed to dispose of the same in accordance with law, after hearing the parties, preferably, within a period of six months from the date of filing of such representation.

5. 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.

6. With the above observation, the writ application stands disposed of.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U