Afjal Ansari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6384 of 2017 ====================================================== Afjal Ansari Son of Late Kasim Ansari, Resident of Village-Abidpur Anchal P.S. Bajpatti, District-Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State Of Bihar and Ors 2.
The Commissioner-Cum-Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms Bihar, Patna.
3.
The District Magistrate, Sitamarhi.
4.
THe Sub-Divisional Officer, Pupari, District-Sitamarhi. 5.
THe Deputy Collector, Land Reforms Pupari Sitamarhi. 6.
The Circle Officer, Bajpatti, District-Sitamarhi. 7.
The Circle Officer, Bajpatti, District-Sitamarhi. 8.
Mansoor Ansari, Son of Aitwar Ansari, Resident of Village-Abidpur Anchal P.S. Bajpatti, District-Sitamarhi.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, Adv.
For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Sajid Salim Khan -Sc25 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 18-11-2025 Heard the parties.
2. The present application has been preferred for the following relief(s):
To quash the land settlement Parcha issuance to the private respondent vide land settlement case No.13/2005-06 by which Parcha has been issued with respect to a land measuring 06 decimal appertaining to Khata No.1265, Plot No. 1036, 1046 and 1213 situated in Mauza. Abidpur within Bajpatti P.S., District-Sitamarhi wrongly and
2/4 illegally issued.
(ii) To direct the District Magistrate, Sitamarhi cancel the Parcha hence forth taken into the consideration of recommendation dated 6.10.15 of the Circle Officer, Bajpatti.
(iii) To any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case.
3. The claim of the petitioner is that on the land that is/was used by them, wrongly Parcha has been issued. A counter affidavit came to be filed on behalf of the respondent nos. 3 to 6 and paragraph 7 read as follows:
7. That in the light of above contentions, it is to be submitted that on receipt of representation dated 12.02.2015 and 19.02.2015 the in Janta Darbar of D.M., Sitamarhi from the petitioner, the D.M., Sitamarhi directed D.C.L.R., Pupri to look into the matter and give report. The D.C.L.R., Pupri made enquiry and found that the house of the petitioner and others and others are situated on the land in question. And thus D.C.L.R., Pupri gave report to D.M., Sitamarhi in favour of the petitioner vide Gyapank No. 281 dated 11.04.2015. Apart from this D.C.L.R., Pupri on the recommendation of C.O., Pupri vide
3/4 Bandobasti Raddikaran Case No. 1/2015-16 send to A.C. Sitamarhi for further action.
Now the case is pending before A.C., Sitamarhi for further disposal. Under such circumstances the petitioner should have to wait for the further order and then after if aggrieved, he should have to knock at the gate of this Hon'ble High Court. But it was not done so and the instant writ petition has been filed which is completely premature and hence liable to be rejected.
4. Upon query from the learned State Counsel as to what is the present status of the Settlement Cancellation Case No. 01 of 2015-16 which is/was pending before the Additional Collector, Sitamarhi, according to him, there is no instruction.
5. Keeping the case pending for years have got no meaning, no proper assistance has been made. In that background, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Additional Collector, Sitamarhi (respondent no. 4) to immediately take up the aforesaid Settlement Cancellation Case No. 01 of 2015-16 if still not disposed of and after noticing/hearing the parties, dispose of the same by 31.01.2026.
6. The aforesaid order has been passed in the backdrop of the fact that neither the petitioner nor the State has any instruction on its disposal.
4/4
7. If the case stands disposed of, no further step is to be taken.
(Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U