Uma Devi v. The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner, Magadh Division ,Gaya

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.846 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-0 Thana- District- Gaya ====================================================== Uma Devi, Wife of Late Ram Lakhan Singh, Resident of Village-Tarava, P.S.- Vajiraganj, District- Gaya.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya 2.

The District Magistrate, Gaya.

3.

The Senior Superintendent of Police, Gaya 4.

The Sub Divisional Officer, Sadar, Gaya 5.

The Officer-in-charge, Wajirganj Police Station, District- Gaya. ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Manish Kumar No.2, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Sheo Shankar Prasad, SC-8 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 15-05-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. This application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of Indian has been filed by the petitioner for issuance of direction to the respondent authorities particularly respondent no.3 to comply the order passed by the Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya dated 13.01.2019 contained in Memo No.156 by which a request has been made to the Collector, Gaya to allot adequate force for demarcation of the land of the petitioner. The petitioner has further prayed to direct the respondent authorities to

Patna High Court CR. WJC No.846 of 2019 dt.15-05-2019 2/2 allot the police force for measurement of the land of the petitioner or any other relief or reliefs to which the petitioner may be found entitled too in the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. In the opinion of this Court, the writ petition is misconceived. Once an order has been passed by the Commissioner and the Sub Divisional Magistrate, it is for them to get their orders executed. The provisions prescribed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can not be misused for the purposes of execution of an order passed by a sub-ordinate court or authority.

4. The application is dismissed.

5. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to take statutory remedies available in law for the redressal of her grievances.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.) Sanjeet/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 18.05.2019 Transmission Date 18.05.2019