Patna High CourtCWJC/5862/2015disposed

Rajendra Prasad Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-10-09Mr. Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5862 of 2015 ====================================================== Rajendra Prasad Singh, Son of Kamla Saran Singh Resident of villageNasriganj Biscuit Factory, P.O- Digha, P.S.- Danapur, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar through the Secretary Home Department, Bihar Patna. 2.

The District Magistrate, Patna 3.

Circle Officer, Danapur 4.

Pramatma Singh, Son of Harendra Singh, Resident of Village- Nasriganj, P.ODigha, P.S.- Danapur, District- Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bharat Bhushan For the Respondent/s :

Mrs. Nutan Kumari Sharma, AC to G.A. 9 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 09-10-2017 Heard learned counsels for the parties.

The present writ application has been filed for a direction to the respondent no. 1 to dispose of the representation dated 24.3.2015, which is pending before the District Magistrate, Patna.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner submitted an application before the District Magistrate, Patna on 24.3.2015 for issuing rent receipt of the land appertaining to Thana No. 17, Khata No. 116, Plot nos. 128,151 and Khata No. 201, Plot Nos. 269,318 and 448. The petitioner also filed an application before the respondent no. 3, Circle Officer, Danapur but the same has not been disposed of as yet.

Patna High Court CWJC No.5862 of 2015(2) dt.09-10-2017 2/2 A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent nos. 2 the District Magistrate, Patna and respondent no. 3, the Circle Officer, Danapur that in pursuance to the application of the petitioner, Mutation Case No. 213 of 2016-17 was initiated. Respondent no.3, the Circle officer, Danapur issued notice to the concerned parties and after inviting objection, rejected the claim of the petitioner vide order dated 19.5.2016. The said order is Annexure A to the counter affidavit. The petitioner again filed an application for similar relief in 2017. In view of the fact that the order has been passed in the aforementioned Mutation case, this writ application is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy of appeal.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) anil/- U