Kapil Yadav v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8820 of 2017 ====================================================== Kapil Yadav Son of Dinanath Yadav, Resident of Village- Sabbalur, P.S.- Didarganj, District- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Revenue Department 2.

The Collector, Patna 3.

The Land Acquisition Office, Patna 4.

Anchal Adhikari Patna Sadar, Patna 5.

Bhoodan Yagan Committee, Bihar, Patna through its Chairman. 6.

Chairman, Bhoodan Yagan Committee, Bihar, Patna ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the State :

Mr. Sajid Salim Khan, SC-25 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 12-01-2026 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner though State is present.

2. The present petition has been preferred for the grant of following relief(s):

"(i) for quashing for quashing the notice dated 27.04.2017 issued under the signature of respondent no. 5 claiming the Land of Khata No. 560, Plot no. 1563 area 19decimals situated in Village Sabbalpur, Thana No. 44, P.S.- Didarganj, District Patna as the Land of Bhoodan Yagan committee which is not correct and without valid ground.

(ii) for issuance of writ of Mandamus commanding the respondent authority to make

Patna High Court CWJC No.8820 of 2017(3) dt.12-01-2026 2/2 the payment of compensation amount of the acquired land of Plot no. 560 aforesaid because it is the Khatiyani land of the petitioner.

(iii) for issuance of writ of Mandamus commanding the respondent no. 5 and 6 to produce the documents, if any, upon which they are claiming the land in question to take compensation amount.

(iv) for issuance of such other appropriate writ or order or direction in the facts and circumstances of this case for the ends of justice."

3. On 16.11.2017, on call, prayer for adjournment was made by the petitioner.

4. Today eight years later, when the case has been called out, there is no appearance.

5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for nonprosecution. (Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U