Patna High CourtCWJC/2102/2009dismissed

Dhrub Narayan Singh And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2015-07-03Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2102 of 2009 ======================================================

1. Dhrub Narayan Singh

2. Prem Kumar Singh

3. Vijay Kumar, all sons of Late Baij Nath Prasad Singh

4. Anup Kumar Singh, son of Late Lalan Prasad Singh

5. Ajay Shankar Singh, son of Late Heera Prasad Singh

6. Abhay Kumar, son of Late Mohan Prasad Singh, All residents of village- Rahua, Post- Rahua, Anchal- Musahari, P.S. Musahari, District- Muzaffarpur .... .... Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Collector, Muzaffarpur

3. The Additional Collector, Muzaffarpur

4. The Circle Officer, Anchal- Musahari, District- Muzaffarpur .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar I For the Respondent/s : Mr. AC to PAAG ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 03-07-2015 Heard Sri Shree Nandan Singh, learned Senior Counsel, who was assisted by Sri Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned AC to the Principal Addl. Advocate General.

The writ petition has been filed in apprehension that the petitioners may be dispossessed from the land in question. Learned counsel for the petitioners, placing reliance on Annexure2 to the writ petition i.e. an order 26.06.1995 passed by a Bench of this Court in C.W.J.C.No.7769 of 1993, submits that this Court has already issued direction that so long option matter is not

Patna High Court CWJC No.2102 of 2009 (6) dt.03-07-2015 decided , the authorities shall neither distribute the aforesaid lands nor dispossess the petitioners from the said land. He submits that till date the option matter has not been adjudicated by the authorities and steps are being taken to dispossess the petitioners from the land.

At the moment, there is nothing on record to suggest that the petitioners have been dispossessed from the land. Accordingly, the Court considers that this writ petition is pre-mature. The writ petition stands dismissed.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) NKS/- U