Uday Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15846 of 2021 ====================================================== 1.

Uday Choudhary Son of Late Baliram Choudhary, resident of Village and P.O. Belaur Police Station- Udwant Nagar, District - Bhojpur. 2.

Awadhesh Choudhary, Son of Late Baliram Choudhary, resident of Village and P.O. Belaur Police Station- Udwant Nagar, District - Bhojpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Additional Chief Secretary Revenue Department, Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Joint Director Consolidation, Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Deputy Director Consolidation, Bhojpur, Ara. 4.

The Consolidation Officer, Udwant Nagar, Bhojpur. 5.

Surendra Choudhary Son of Late Lakshman Choudhary, resident of Village and P.O.- Belaur, P.S. Udwant Nagar, District - Bhojpur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate Mr. Brajesh Prasad Gupta, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Viveka Nand Singh, Advocate Mr. Raj Kishore Roy, GP 18 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 27-08-2025 The petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Chairman, Bihar Land Tribunal in B.L.T Case No. 404 of 2019 on 9th June 2021.

2. By filing the aforesaid case the petitioners prayed for setting aside of an order dated 26.02.2019 passed by the Joint Director, Consolidation, Bihar, Patna in Revision Case No. 286 of 2017 which was dismissed by the Joint Director, Consolidation, Bihar affirming the order dated 05.09.2017

Patna High Court CWJC No.15846 of 2021 dt.27-08-2025 2/2 passed by the Deputy Director, Consolidation, Bhojpur. The petitioners are claiming half share of the land on the basis of C.S record of rights on the other hand, the respondent no. 5 is claiming 3⁄4 portion of the disputed land on the basis of subsequent record of rights, i.e., R.S record of rights. The Tribunal rightly relied upon the subsequent record of rights prepared in accordance with law and held that 3⁄4 of the disputed property is recorded in the name of respondent no. 5 over which the petitioners cannot claim any possession.

3. Considering such circumstances and on careful perusal of the impugned order passed by the Tribunal on 9th June, 2021, I do not find any illegality for issuance of any writ against the impugned order. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed on contest.

4. Parties are at liberty to take appropriate action before the competent court of law.

(Bibek Chaudhuri, J) Prakash/- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date Transmission Date