Binod Kumar Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10122 of 2024 ====================================================== 1.

Binod Kumar Chaudhary S/o Late Narayan Chaudhary, Resident of Village and P.O. Tika Patti, Circle Rupauli, District-Purnea. 2.

Ashok Kumar Chaudhary, S/o Late Narayan Chaudhary, Resident of Village and P.O. Tika Patti, Circle Rupauli, District-Purnea. 3.

Vikash Kumar Chaudhary, S/o Late Pramod Chaudhary, Resident of Village and P.O. Tika Patti, Circle Rupauli, District-Purnea. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The District Magistrate/Collector, Purnea.

3.

The Sub-Divisional Magistrate/S.D.O. Dhamdaha, Purnea. 4.

The Circle Officer, Rupauli Division, Dhamdaha, District-Purnea. 5.

Jhalo Mandal S/o Late Budhu Mandal, Resident of Village, P.O. and P.S. Taka Patti, Circle Rupauli, District-Purnea.

6.

Lukhru Mandal, S/o Late Budhu Mandal, Resident of Village, P.O. and P.S. Taka Patti, Circle Rupauli, District-Purnea.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Jitendra Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Singh, AAG-13 Mr. Rajat Kumar Tiwary AC to AAG-13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 04-07-2024 Heard Mr. Jitendra Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Rajat Kumar Tiwary, AC to AAG-13.

2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 06.01.2024 passed in Appeal Vad No. 06/2022-2023 by which the S.D.O., Dhamdaha, District - Purnea has rejected the Appeal preferred by the petitioner under 48 D of the B.T. Act. The petitioner also sought quashing of the order dated 17.02.2018 passed in Vad No. 1/17-18 by the Circle Officer, Rupauli

Patna High Court CWJC No.10122 of 2024(2) dt.04-07-2024 2/2 whereby he has issued certificate of Sikmidar to Kaymi under 48 D of the B.T. Act. Assailing the impugned order, various grounds have been taken by the writ petitioners. However, before adverting to the contention raised by the petitioners, learned Advocate for the State submits that the petitioners have expedient alternative remedy before the Bihar Land Tribunal under the Bihar Land Dispute Resolution Act, 2009.

3. Considering the nature of the relief sought for in the writ petition, this Court finds substance in the submission of the learned Advocate for the State.

4. The petitioners are directed to pursue their remedy before the Bihar Land Tribunal.

5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with the liberty to the petitioners to pursue their remedy before the Bihar Land Tribunal..

6. Needless to observe that in case the petitioners approach before the Tribunal the case shall be decided expeditiously.

(Harish Kumar, J) Guddu/- U