Mandip Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10544 of 2024 ====================================================== 1.

Mandip Yadav, S/o-Late Sivnarayan Yadav, R/o Village - Rampur Parasia Tole - Parasadih, Post - Indrar, P.S.- Rafiganj, District - Aurangabad (Bihar). 2.

Naresh Yadav, S/o-Late Sivnarayan Yadav, R/o Village - Rampur Parasia Tole - Parasadih, Post - Indrar, P.S.- Rafiganj, District - Aurangabad (Bihar). ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

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

2.

The District Magistrate, Aurangabad (Bihar).

3.

The Land Reform Deputy Collector, Aurangabad (Bihar). 4.

The Circle Officer, Rafiganj, Aurangabad (Bihar). ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Government Pleader 19 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 15-07-2024 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner by filing the writ petition seeks a direction upon the respondents to settle the land in question as descripted in para 1, situated at village Rampur Parasia Tole Parasidh in Rafiganj Police Station, in the District of Aurangabad in their favour, as they have been coming in possession of the land for the several decades by constructing their houses.

3. It is also contended that the petitioners' father have been given Malikana possession over the land by the then Jamindar in view of Compensation Case no. 23515 of 1954-55

Patna High Court CWJC No.10544 of 2024(2) dt.15-07-2024 2/2 and Compensation Case no. 4345 of 1953-54 respectively.

4. It is also the contention of the petitioner that time without number they have approached before the LRDC, Aurangabad and the Collector, Aurangabad but even their claims were not considered till date. Copies of the objections/representations have also been brought on record by way of Annexure -7 and 9 to the writ petition.

5. At this stage, learned Advocate for the State submits that the land in question is Gairmajarua land and till date no decision of settlement has been taken in this regard.

6. Considering the limited prayer of the petitioner, the writ petition stands disposed with a direction to the District Magistrate, Aurangabad to take a final decision on the representation of the petitioner as contained in Annexure 9. The aforesaid exercise must be completed preferably within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt/production of the a copy of this order.

(Harish Kumar, J) supratim/- U