Patna High CourtCWJC/12066/2013disposed

Urmila Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-09-27Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12066 of 2013 ====================================================== Urmila Devi, Wife of Devendra Yadav, Resident of Village - Bakaha, P.S. - Shaharghat, District - Madhubani.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar Through The Principal Secretary, Law Department, Govt. 0f Bihar, Patna

2. Sushila Devi W/O Rameshwar Yadav, Resident of Village - Chikua, P.S. Pupri, District - Sitamarhi.

3. Asha Devi W/O Yogendra Yadav Resident of Village - Samdah, P.S. - Benipatti, District - Madhubani.

4. Niyasa Kumari, W/O Arun Yadav Resident of Ward No. 18, Town And P.S. - Madhubani, District - Madhubani

5. Ranju Kumari W/O Manoj Kumar Resident of Village - Bachhra, P.S. - Benipatti, District - Madhubani

6. Mostt. Jatni Devi W/O Ramashish Yadav Resident of Village - Bokaha Salempur, P.S. - Shaharghat, District - Madhubani. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.

For the Respondent/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 27-09-2016 Heard.

This application has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 30.11.2011 passed in L.A.P.S. Case No. 62 of 2011, whereby the Lok Adalat, Madhubani passed the award on the basis of the compromise between the parties in respect to land as detailed in L.A.P.S. Case No. 62 of 2011.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in fact, the petitioner has also right, title and interest in respect to land as

Patna High Court CWJC No.12066 of 2013 (2) dt.27-09-2016 2/2 detailed in L.A.P.S. Case No. 62 of 2011, but he was not made party and behind the petitioner the award is passed through the impugned order.

I find no illegality to interfere with the same in extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and accordingly the present application is dismissed. However, the petitioner will be at liberty to approach before appropriate forum for redressal of his grievance.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J.) manish/- U