Paltan Bhagat v. Director Of Consolidation Andors

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.347 of 1998 ====================================================== Paltan Bhagat, son of Late Ram Nandan Bhagat, resident of villageBherokhra, P.S.-Patepur, District-Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

Director Of Consolidation, Bihar, Patna.

2.

Deputy Director of Consolidation, Vaishali.

3.

Consolidation Officer, Patepur, District-Vaishali. 4 (a) Jogindra Bhagat, son of Late Bhonu Bhagat.

4 (b) Peyaria Devi, wife of Late Bhonu Bhagat 5 (a) Suraj Bhagat, son of Late Sarjug Bhagat.

6 (b) Binod Bhagat, son of Late Ram Bilas Bhagat.

7.

Ram Sewak Bhagat.

8.

Lal Deo Bhagat (All sons of Late Baudh Bhagat, resident of village-Bherokhra, P.S.- Patepur, District-Vaishali.

9 (a) Sharda Bhagat, son of Late Bisheshwar Bhagat, resident of villageBherokhra, P.S.-Patepur, District-Vaishali. 10.

Maya Devi, wife of Babulal Bhagat.

11.

Babulal Bhagat, son of Ramashish Bhagat, both resident of villageChapaith, P.S.-Goraul, District-Vaishali. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Naresh Chandra Verma, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Gyan Shankar, AC to GP-2 For the Pvt. Respondents :

Mr. Mallika Majumdar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 25-11-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed with a prayer for quashing the order dated 25.09.1997 passed by Director of Consolidation, Bihar, Patna in Revision Case No. 1 of 1985 (Annexure-5).

Patna High Court CWJC No.347 of 1998 dt.25-11-2021 2/2

3. Learned counsel for the respondents, at the outset itself, invites reference to Section 9 of Bihar Land Tribunal Act, 2009 which provides that the Tribunal shall have the power to entertain any application against the final order passed by the appropriate authorities under various enactments, inter alia, including the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956. It is therefore, submitted that the issues arising out of the impugned order can well be adjudicated by the Tribunal.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the above proposition and has no objection in this regard.

5. The Registry is accordingly directed to transmit the records of this case to the Tribunal forthwith, in view of the proviso to Section 15 of the Bihar Land Tribunal Act, 2009.

6. It is expected that the Tribunal, having regard to the long period during which the case has remained pending, shall take steps for its expeditious disposal, preferably within a period of one year.

(Vikash Jain, J) V.K.Pandey/- AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.

CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 26.11.2021 Transmission Date N.A.