Sachindeo Prasad v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8858 of 2011 ====================================================== SACHINDEO PRASAD Son Of Late Mahadeo Prasad Resident Of Village - Bangaon Bazar, Post - Bajpatti, P.S. - Bajpatti, District - Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State Of Bihar 2.
The District Magistrate, Sitamarhi 3.
The Inspector, Smt Mukta Verma Registery Office, Tirhut Commissioner, Comp Office, Sitamarhi 4.
The District Sub Registrar Ajay Kumar Sharma, Sitamarhi 5.
The Sub-Registrar Sanjay Kumar Gowdier Pupuri Sub-Division - Pupri, District Sitamarhi 6.
The Head Clerk Bhuneshwar Mishra Pupri, District - Sitamarhi Comp Office, Sitamarhi ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Dhaneshwar Prasad Gupta, Adv.
For the Respondent/s :
Mr.Md. Nasarool Hoda Kha Sc1 Ms. Babita Kumari, AC to SC-1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 02-08-2022 After some argument, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to assail the order dated 22.02.2011 passed by the Inspector of Registration, Tirhut Division, Camp, Sitamarhi in case no. 71 of 2009, by filing appropriate appeal. The learned counsel for the respondent State submits that in case appropriate appeal is filed within a period of four weeks from today, appropriate decision shall be taken thereon on merits and appropriate order shall be passed expeditiously. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate appeal against
Patna High Court CWJC No.8858 of 2011(6) dt.02-08-2022 2/2 the aforesaid order dated 22.02.2011 and in case such an appeal is filed within a period of four weeks from today, the appellate authority shall consider the same on merits, without being impeded by the issue of limitation and shall pass appropriate order, in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks, thereafter.
It may be clarified that since the petitioner had availed an ill advised remedy, by approaching this Court, the time involved in prosecuting the present writ petition before this Court i.e. from the month of May, 2011 till date, has weighed with this Court in directing the appellant authority to consider the appeal on merits.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Tiwary/- U