Yashwant Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16581 of 2008 =================================================== Yashwant Singh, S/o Late Raghuvansh Narayan Singh, resident of village Balua Koari, P.S. Hajipur Sadar, District Vaishali.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through its Chief Secretary, Old Secretariat Building, Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary to Govt. in the Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Old Secretariat Building, Patna.

3. The Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur.

4. The Collector, Vaishali.

5. The Additional Collector, Vaishali.

6. The Dy. Collector, Land Reforms, Hajipur.

7. The Anchal Adhikari, Hajipur.

...............Respondents 1st Set.

8. Krishnadeo Dwivedi, S/o late Shyam Prasad Dwivedi, resident of village Purva, P.S.

Hajipur Sadar, district Vaishali.

9. Ramsumari Devi, W/o late Yogendra Kunwar, resident of village Gadopur, P.S.

Mahua, District Vaishali.

10.

Nawal Kishore Tiwari, S/o Shri Upendra Tiwari, resident of village Purva, P.S. Hajipur Sadar, district Vaishali.

11.

Parvati Devi, W/o Shri Upendra Tiwari, resident of village Purva, P.S. Hajipur Sadar, district Vaishali.

.... .... Respondents 2nd Set.

=================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : AC to PAAG Mr. Surendra Kishore Thakur =================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

9. 23-06-2015 Heard Sri J.S. Arora, learned counsel, who was assisted by Sri Sunil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.C.

Patna High Court CWJC No.16581 of 2008 (9) dt.23-06-2015 2/3 to Principal Addl. Advocate General as well as Sri Surendra Kishore Thakur, learned counsel, who appears on behalf of respondent no. 9.

The present writ petition has been filed with a prayer to quash an order dated 10-06-2008 passed in Mutation Revision Case No. 24 of 1988-89.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though, the petitioner was not party in the revision petition nor any notice was ever given to the petitioner, an order has been passed in a revision case, which was filed by one Krishnadeo Dwivedi, arraying some persons as opposite parties without impleading the petitioner.

The learned revisional court had allowed the revision petition and passed a blanket order, whereby earlier mutation orders were cancelled, even the mutation order, which was passed in favour of the petitioner, has also been effected by the said order.

The Court is of the opinion that if an order is passed without hearing of the petitioner, instead of approaching the writ

Patna High Court CWJC No.16581 of 2008 (9) dt.23-06-2015 3/3 court, he would have approached the concerned court and filed appropriate petition.

In view of the facts and circumstances, the writ petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent authority to file a petition for modification/clarification of the order.

(Rakesh Kumar, J.) Anay/- U