Patna High CourtMJC/509/2015disposed

Parsuram Kumar And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-03-29Mr. Justice Shivaji Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.509 of 2015 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 3614 of 2014 ======================================================

1. Parsuram Kumar, Son of Late Harihar Prasad.

2. Sarvesh Prasad, Son of Ram Sahai Mahto

3. Mahesh Prasad, Son of Late Sandagar Mahto

4. Balram Prasad, Son of Late Ganauri Prasad

5. Sudhir Kumar, Son of Late Suresh Prasad

6. Ajay Kumar, Son of Shiv Nandan Prasad.

7. Shiv Kumar Prasad, Son of Chandrika Prasad.

8. Arvind Prasad Son of Siya Saran Prasad

9. Rashbihari Prasad son of Ramjee Mahto

10. Chandrashekhar Prasad, Son of Late Saudagar Mahto

11. Birendra Kumar, Son of Late Basudeo Mahto. All are resident of village- Raipur, Koyalbigha, P.S. Tharthari, District- Nalanda. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Sri B. Kartikeya, The collector, Nalanda, District- Nalanda.

3. Smt. Rachna Patil, the deputy Development Commissioner, Biharshariff, Nalanda, District- Nalanda.

4. Sri Rudra Kr. Prasad, the Distric Land Acquistion Officer, Biharshariff, District- Nalanda.

5. Sri Ram Kishore Sharma, the Electric Suprietending Engineer, Biharshariff Division, Nalanda.

6. Sri Engineer Ram Birendra Pd., the Electric Executive Engineer, Biharshariff, Division, Nalanda.

7. Sri Ram Prem Uraon, the Circle Officer, Anchal Chandi now Tharthari, P.S. Tharthari, District- Nalanda.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satya Ranjan Sinha For the Respondent/s : Mr. Devendra Kr Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 29-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

Learned counsel for the State submits that order of this Court has already been complied with but learned

Patna High Court MJC No.509 of 2015 (5) dt.29-03-2017 counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are not satisfied with the certain part of the said order. Accordingly this proceeding is dropped. However, the petitioners will be at liberty to take legal course as available in law.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) Vinay/- U