Sudhir Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10944 of 2021 ====================================================== Sudhir Kumar Singh, S/o Late Chandeshwar Singh, Resident of villageRanipur, P.S.- Phulwari, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through its Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Government of Bihar, patna 2.

The Collector, Patna 3.

The Superintendent of Police, Patna 4.

The Circle Officer, Phulwarisharif, Patna 5.

Rakesh Raushan, S/o Mahendra Yadav, Resident of Mohalla- Lalji Tola, P.S.- Kadamkuan, Patna ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Md. Khurshid Alam, AAG-12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-09-2025 The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs :- " i) For issuance of appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus seeking direction to Respondents to not disturb/alienate/ dispossess the petitioner from his land having its Khata No. 64, Plot No. 654, Thana No. 34, situated in Mauza - Ashopur having an area of 2800 square feet which has been purchased by him from one Noorjahan but Respondent No. 5 is trying to dispossess him without any valid reason.

ii) For issuance of appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus seeking direction to Respondents to give proper protection to petitioner to exercise his right

2/4 and duties and continue his construction work over the property which he had purchased as the same is in danger and for which petitioner had made several request to Respondent but all went in vain.

iii) For any other relief/reliefs for which petitioner is entitled for.

2. Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Md. Khurshid Alam, learned AAG-12 for the State respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has purchased a piece of land pertaining to Khata No. 64, Plot No. 654, total area- 3.2140 decimals, situated in Mauza - Ashopur (Phulwari), District - Patna, through a registered sale deed from one Noorjahan, W/o Usman Gani. The vendor of the petitioner had purchased the said land from one Madhup Prasad, S/o- Late Rama Shankar Prasad, through a registered sale deed on 06.07.1993 and after the purchase, the said land was mutated in favour of the petitioner's vendor (Noorjahan) and thereafter, rent receipts were started to be issued in her name and the same was paid up to the year 2021 and till that period, there was no hindrance. It is further submitted that the petitioner purchased the land in question in the year 2021 and instructed some labourers for soil filing work over his land but one person, namely, Rakesh Raushan, S/o- Mahendra Yadav, and some

3/4 unknown persons started harassing the petitioner and stopped the soil work. The petitioner has filed several applications before the Officer-in-Charge of Danapur Police station and the Superintendent of Police, Patna, but no action has been taken by any of them to redress his grievance.

4. The State-Respondents (Nos. 2 to 4) have filed their counter affidavit in which it has been accepted that the petitioner has purchased 1400 square feet land pertaining to Khata No. 64, Plot No. 654 through sale deed No. 3627 dated 02.03.2021, in the name of his wife Smt. Nirmala Devi and further, equal area of land, i.e. 1400 sq. feet, has also been purchased pertaining to the same plot from Smt. Noorjahan Khatoon and after mutation, the revenue receipt is being issued in the name of petitioner's wife and the second party - Rakesh Raushan (respondent No. 5) did not submit any document with regard to his claim over the land in question.

5. Considering the above-mentioned facts, the Superintendent of Police, Patna and the District Magistrate, Patna, are hereby directed to look into the matter pertaining to the petitioner's wife's purchased land as well as the alleged harassment caused by the private respondent No. 5 and take necessary and effective steps to redress the petitioner's

4/4 grievance, if he has, within four weeks from the date of receipt or production of a copy of this Court's order.

6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Shailendra Singh, J) annu/- U