Surendra Prasad Yadav @ Surendra Rai v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19272 of 2014 ======================================================

1. Surendra Prasad Yadav @ Surendra Rai S/o- Baran Rai, r/o- VillageSunderpur, P.S.- Sursand, District- Sitamarhi .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Registration Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

2. The Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur

3. The District Magistrate, Sitamarhi

4. The Dist. Sub Registrar, Sitamarhi

5. Mithilesh Devi, Wife of Late Dina Nath Sah, resident of Mohalla- Pothia Road, Ward No. 8 (Lohapatti), P.S.- Sitamarhi, District- Sitamarhi .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Kant Singh For the Respondent/s : AC to GP 13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 11-08-2015 Heard Sri Krishna Kant Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AC to GP No. 13.

The petitioner, invoking writ jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has prayed for issuance of direction to the concerned authorities for registration of the sale deed dated 24.4.2010 and alternatively, a prayer is being made for directing the appellate authority i.e. the Collector - cum- Registrar, Sitamrhi to finally dispose of Case No. 39 of 2010.

In this case a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent and in paragraph no. 3(ii) it has been stated

Patna High Court CWJC No.19272 of 2014 (2) dt.11-08-2015 2/2 "It is expected that hearing will be completed at the earliest and the case No. 39 of 2010 will be disposed of soon after completion of hearing of the parties".

Learned counsel for the petitioner has made a limited prayer for directing the respondent / appellate authority to take final decision on the appeal.

In view of prayer made by the petitioner and stand taken in the counter affidavit, the court considers that this writ petition can be disposed of with an observation that the respondents, particularly, the appellate authority may take appropriate steps, so that, the appeal i.e. Case No. 39 of 2010 may come to its logical end preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt /production of a copy of this order. The writ petition stands disposed of.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/- U