Patna High CourtMJC/2653/2015disposed

Raj Kumar Prasad And ANR v. The State Of Bihar Through Sri Deepak Anand District Magistrate Saran ,Chapra And ORS

2017-06-21Mr. Justice Shivaji Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2653 of 2015 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 11102 of 2013 ===========================================================

1. Raj Kumar Prasad Son Of Late Sheo Pujan Sah

2. Sanju Devi Wife Of Raj Kumar Prasad Both Resident Of Village Peerganj Shitalpur, P.S. Dighwara, District Saran, Chapra .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Sri Deepak Anand District Magistrate Saran, Chapra.

2. Sri Praveen Kumar, Additional Collector, Saran, District- Chapra.

3. Sri Ramadhar Ram, Executive Engineer, Building Division, Saran, Chapra, District- Chapra.

4. Sri Madan Kumar, Sub Divisional Officer, Sonepur, District Saran, Chapra

5. Sri Ajay Shankar, Circle Officer, Dighwara, Saran, District- Chapra

6. Sri Manjeet Kumar, District Land Acquisition Officer, Saran, District- Chapra .... .... Contemnor/Opp. Parties =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Shrivastava, Adv. Mr. Shri Krishna Sinha, Adv.

For the Respondent/s : Mr. Chitranjan Sinha, PAAG-2 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 21-06-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and counsel for the State.

In this case, this Court, vide order dated 20.6.2014 passed in CWJC No. 11102 of 2013, had given direction in the following terms:- "This Court directs, the matter of petitioners be referred to 5-man Committee which will examine the objection of the petitioners in accordance with law, take into consideration the objection raised by them after giving them proper hearing. The whole process should be completed within

Patna High Court MJC No.2653 of 2015 dt.21-06-2017 three months from the date of production of copy of this order." In view of the above direction, the Committee has examined the matter and found that the land, in question, is of residential nature and not commercial.

This Court does not find any purpose to proceed further. The petitioner, if so advised, may take any other legal course as is available in law.

Accordingly, the contempt proceeding is dropped. (Shivaji Pandey, J) Rishi/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 23.06.2017 Transmission Date NA