Tribhuwan Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1546 of 2022 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.390 of 2021 ====================================================== Tribhuwan Singh son of Late Dinesh Nandan Singh, resident of Village Urvishunpur, P.O. Urvishunpur, P.S. Alipur, District Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Land Reforms Department, Bihar, Patna namely Sri Brijesh Mehrotra. 2.

Dr. Tyag Rajan, the District Collector, Gaya. 3.

Sri Manoj Kumar, the Additional Collector, Gaya. 4.

Shri Salim Akhar the Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Gaya. 5.

Sri Anand Prakash Ram, the Circle Officer, Tekari, District Gaya. 6.

Anil Singh, son of Ramji Singh, resident of Village- Urvishunpur, P.O. Urvishunpur, P.S. Alipur, District Gaya.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Khurshid Alam (AAG-12) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI) 11-07-2023 The present M.J.C. is filed for non-compliance of the order of this Court dated 22.06.2021 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 390 of 2021. Orders of this Court only to the extent that the petitioner was permitted to file representation insofar as encroachment issue on a particular plot/land. In this regard, the petitioner is stated to have submitted representation and such representation was considered and the Circle Officer, Tekari, Gaya has passed an order stating that there was no encroachment as alleged by the petitioner in his representation. To that effect, an office note has been prepared on 12.01.2023 and the same has been placed on

Patna High Court MJC No.1546 of 2022(6) dt.11-07-2023 2/2 record. Merely making notes in the note-sheet and producing the same in the contempt proceedings, it does not amount to compliance. When this Court has specifically directed the concerned Authority to pass a reasoned and speaking order. The concerned authority is required to pass a reasoned and speaking order so as to enable the petitioner to question the validity of the same in the manner known to the law. Therefore, the Circle Officer, Tekari, Gaya is hereby directed to pass a speaking order and communicate the same to the petitioner within a period of one week from today. If he is aggrieved by such speaking order, he is at liberty to file fresh writ petition or invoke such remedy available to the petitioner.

2. With the above observations, the present M.J.C. stands dropped.

3. Petitioner is at liberty to file M.J.C. or Interlocutory Application to revive the order in the event of non-compliance of the present order by the Circle Officer.

(P. B. Bajanthri, J) (Jitendra Kumar, J) Shoaib/- U