← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/12660/2019disposed

Sinhesar Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

2019-06-26Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12660 of 2019 ====================================================== 1.

Sinhesar Paswan Son of Saryug Paswan Resident of Village-Shambhwar Tola Kaitola, P.S. Madhubani, District-Madhubani. 2.

Asarfi Saday Son of Rup Lal Saday, Resident of Village-Khajuri, P.S.- Madhubani, District-Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Bihar 2.

The Principal Secretary, land and Revenue Department, Government of Bihar, Patna 3.

The District Magistrate, Madhubani.

4.

The Sub Divisional Officer, Madhubani.

5.

The Deputy Collector Land Reforms Sadar Madhubani, District-Madhubani. 6.

The Circle Officer Rahika, District-Madhubani 7.

Kapildeo Das Son of Yugal Narayan Das, Resident of Village-Shambhuar, Tole-Kaitola, P.S. Madhubani, District-Madhubani ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Manoj Kumar Jha For the Respondent/s :

Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 26-06-2019 Though this application has been listed under the heading "For office Notes", with certain defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter, considering the nature of controversy involved, I am disposing it of, by the present order after learned counsel for the petitioners.

2. The petitioners have questioned an order passed by the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Sadar, Madhubani as competent authority under Bihar Land Dispute Resolution Act,

Patna High Court CWJC No.12660 of 2019(2) dt.26-06-2019 2/2 2009 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') dated 12.03.2018.

3. The petitioners have remedy of appeal against the said order, which apparently they have not availed.

4. This application is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioners to prefer appeal against the impugned order. Evidently, an appeal against the impugned order would be barred by limitation. The petitioners shall be at liberty to apply for condonation of delay in preferring the appeal, which shall be considered by the appellate authority on its own merit, in accordance with law.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) arun/- U