Patna High CourtC. REV./144/2015dismissed

Batoran Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-01-20Mr. Justice Navaniti Prasad Singh,Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

Patna High Court C. REV. No.144 of 2015 (2) dt.20-01-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Review No.144 of 2015 In LPA 194 of 2009 ======================================================

1. Batoran Singh, Son of Late Lochhan Singh, resident of Village- Nawalia, P.O. Dighita, P.S. Kochas (Parsathua), District- Rohtas. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Additional Member Board of Revenue Bihar, Patna.

3. The Additional Collector, Rohtas.

4. The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Sasaram, Rohtas.

5. Jokhan Singh son of Late Parikshan Singh,

6. Kamal Prasad Singh son of Jokhan Singh, All resident of VillageNawalia, P.O. Dighita, P.S. Kochas (Parsathua), District- Rohtas.

7. Kameshwar Singh son of Bansh Narain Singh, resident of VillageNawalia, P.O. Dighita, P.S. Kochas (Parsathua), District- Rohtas. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Makardhwaj Upadhyay For the Respondent/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH) 20-01-2016 I. A. No. 6420 of 2015 The delay in filing this review application is condoned. Accordingly, this interlocutory application stands allowed. The review petitioner was the appellant and the unsuccessful writ petitioner. He had lost the writ petition challenging the order of the Member Board of Revenue and in appeal also he lost before this Court.

Patna High Court C. REV. No.144 of 2015 (2) dt.20-01-2016 In the review application, Sri Rajeev Roy, learned counsel, submits that he has taken the ground that the authority who heard the appeal had no jurisdiction. This ground was neither taken before the Member Board of Revenue nor in the writ petition nor in the Letters Patent Appeal. It cannot now be permitted to be taken, even if it was available. It is not a good ground for review of the order, this review application is accordingly, dismissed.

(Navaniti Prasad Singh, J) (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U