Md. Alamgir v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1505 of 2015 ====================================================== Md. Alamgir, son of Sk. Umer Ali, resident of Sabooter Bithnauli East, P.S.- K. Nagar, District- Purnea.
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Collector, Purnea.
2. The Additional Collector, Incharge, Purnea.
3. The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Sadar, Purnea.
4. Bhanu Bhaskar Chaudhary, son of Late Krishna Murari Chaudhary, resident of Parora, P.S.- K. Nagar, at present residing at Sri Nagar Road, P.s. & P.O. Purnea, District- Purnea.
5. Md. Sahbaj Alam, son of Md. Samsud Hoda.
6. Md. Sahid Raja, son of Md. Samsud Hoda.
7. Md. Salik Raja, son of M. Samsud Hoda.
All are resident of Sabooter Bithnauli East, P.S.- K. Nagar, DistrictPurnea. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manis Kumar Sinha, A.C. to S.C.30 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN ORAL ORDER 27-01-2015 The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 10.1.2014 passed by the D.C.L.R., Purnea Sadar in Bataidari Case No.128/77/2012 which was initiated at the instance of the petitioner under Section 48E of the Bihar Tenancy Act, 1885. By the impugned order, his claim has been rejected. Learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner has approached this Court without exhausting the alternative remedy which has been provided before the Land Tribunal under the Bihar Land Tribunal Act, 2009. He points out Section 9(i) which provides a remedy before the tribunal
Patna High Court CWJC No.1505 of 2015 (2) dt.27-01-2015 against any final order which has been passed by the authority provided no forum of appellate or revision against the order passed is available in the concerned Act. Learned counsel has categorically stated that the order passed under Section 48 Sub Section (i) or (ii) either rejecting or initiating the proceeding is not appealable before any authority, thus, in such case, the remedy would definitely lie under Section 9 of the Act. He further submits that the petitioner may also approach the tribunal under Section 14 of the Act as under such provision it is competent to call for and examine the records of proceedings disposed off by an original, appellate or revisional authority acting under the statutes covered by the Act. He further points out that Bihar Tenancy Act, 1885 stands included in the concerned schedule of the Act. In response to the aforesaid limb of argument advanced on behalf of the State, learned counsel for the petitioner now seeks liberty to move before the Bihar Land Tribunal.
In above view of the matter, this writ application is being disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum which would be available to him under law. In such case, the forum should consider the
Patna High Court CWJC No.1505 of 2015 (2) dt.27-01-2015 case of the petitioner and take a decision on its own merit and in accordance with law but not before granting opportunity to all the parties concerned.
(Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J) N.H./- U