Reshma Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.25707 of 2013 ====================================================== Reshma Devi W/O Gurudeo Mandal, resident of Village Simra, P.S. Tikapatti, District Purnea.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Collector, Purnea.

3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Dhamdaha, District Purnea.

4. The Dy. Collector Land Reforms, Dhamdaha, District Purnea.

5. The Circle Officer, Rupauli, District Purnea. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bhola Prasad, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sidharth Shankar Pandey, AC to GP 24 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-04-2016 Heard the parties.

In view of nature of grievance raised on behalf of the petitioner in the present writ petition with respect to lands in question, fully detailed in paragraph 1 of the writ petition itself, the writ petitioner is hereby directed to approach the respondent Circle Officer, Rupauli by filing an appropriate petition under Section 3 of The Bihar Land Mutation Act, 2011 (in short, "the Act, 2011") for mutation of the lands in question. If an appropriate petition is filed on behalf of the petitioner under Section 3 of the aforesaid Act, 2011 within a period of one month from today before the respondent Circle Officer, Rupauli with all relevant materials/documents as also with a certified copy of the present order, then the respondent Circle Officer, Rupauli shall be obliged to initiate a proceeding under the provisions of the Act, 2011 and shall further be obliged to take it to its logical conclusion and shall pass an appropriate final order strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Act and Rules

Patna High Court CWJC No.25707 of 2013 (2) dt.18-04-2016 2/2 made thereunder. However, before passing any final order, an opportunity of hearing must be given to all concerned including the petitioner, besides others, who may have some claims over the lands in question.

This is clarified that this Court has not gone into the merits of the claims raised on behalf of the petitioner and this is left to be decided by the concerned authorities under the provisions of the Act, 2011 strictly in accordance with law. The writ petition stands finally disposed of with the observations and directions made above.

(Birendra Prasad Verma, J) Tahir/- U