Anandi Prasad Bishwas v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18583 of 2008 ====================================================== Anandi Prasad Bishwas son of late Mahagu Bishwas, resident of village Maldwar, P.S. Palasi, District- Araria.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Additional Collector, Araria.

4. Ganga Prasad son of late Ruchi Lal Bishwas, resident of village Maldawar, P.S. Palasi, District Araria.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raddhey Shyam Prasad Mr. Santosh Kr. Singh Mr. Dhiraj Sagar.

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rajesh Ranjan, AC to SC-31 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-04-2015 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned A.C. to SC-31 appearing on behalf of the respondent no. 1 to 3.

By the impugned order dated 18.09.2008 (Annexure-1) passed in Case No. 14 of 2007-08 by the respondent Additional Collector, a direction has been issued for realisation of rent from the respondent no.4 with respect to the lands under dispute. From the averments made in the writ petition filed on behalf of the petitioner as also from the consideration made in the impugned order, it appears that there are disputes of right, title and possession of the parties over the lands under dispute. The petitioner as also the respondent no. 4, both lay their claims of rights, title and possession over the lands under dispute by referring to certain documents which cannot be effectively gone into in a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Patna High Court CWJC No.18583 of 2008 (3) dt.13-04-2015 2/2 For the aforesaid reasons, the present writ petition has to fail and is, accordingly, dismissed.

However, the petitioner, if so advised, may approach the civil court of competent jurisdiction by filing an appropriate civil suit for grant of appropriate relief(s). If such a suit is filed by the petitioner, then the same shall be considered and decided on its own merit without being prejudiced by the rejection of the present writ petition and that suit shall be decided on the basis of the evidence/ materials produced by the parties irrespective of the findings recorded by the revenue3 authority in the impugned order.

(Birendra Prasad Verma, J) BTiwary/- U