Mohammad Hussain v. The State Of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary Department Of Revenue And Land Reforms Government

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.357 of 2015 ====================================================== Mohammad Hussain Son of Late Navi Mian, Resident of village - Chitkhor, Police Station - Nasriganj, District - Rohtas ( Bihar ) .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Department of Revenue and Land Reforms Government of Bihar, Patna

2. The District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram

3. The Superintendent of Police, Rohtas at Sasaram

4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Bikramganj

5. The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Bikramganj, Rohtas, Bihar

6. The Circle officer, Nasriganj, Rohtas

7. The Officer Incharge of Nasriganj, Police Station, District - Rohtas .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ga12-Ajay ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 27-01-2016 The prayer of the petitioner in the present application preferred under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India as narrated in para-1 to the present application is as under :- "1. That this writ application is being filed for issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction to respondent concerned for complying and enforcing the order dated 28.4.2000 passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Bikramganj in Case No.1320/1999 whereby and whereunder direction is given for demarcating

Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.357 of 2015 (2) dt.27-01-2016 2/2 the land of petitioner with the help of adequate police force.

And further for direction to Superintendent of Police Rohtas to provide adequate police force for execution of the aforesaid order for which the petitioner is legally entitled.

And/or for granting any other incidental, consequential or other appropriate relief/reliefs to which the petitioner is found entitled."

In view of the availability of an equally efficacious statutory remedy to the petitioner, I am not inclined to entertain the present application in the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Accordingly, the application is dismissed.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) N.H./- U T