Binod Kumar @ Binod Paswan And ANR v. Sidheshwari Kumar Singh @ Sidheshwari Prasad Singh And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.206 of 2018 In Civil Review No.188 of 2015 ======================================================

1. Binod Kumar @ Binod Paswan, Son of Late Kamaldeo Prasad.

2. Krishna Prasad @ Jham Sahu @ Jham, Son of Mannu Ram, All resident of Mohalla - Chhotaki Delha, P.s. - Delha, District - Gaya.

... ... Petitioners- Appellant/s

Versus

1. Sidheshwari Kumar Singh @ Sidheshwari Prasad Singh Son of Late Din Dayal Ram, Resident of Mohalla - Chhotaki Delha, P.S. - Delha, District - Gaya.

... Respondent/petitioner/ Opposite Party.

2. The State of Bihar

3. The District Magistrate, Gaya.

4. The Sub Divisional Officer, Sadar, Gaya.

5. The Land Reforms, Deputy Collector, Gaya.

6. The Circle Officer, Town District - Gaya.

7. The Survey Superintendent, Municipal Corporation White House Area, Gaya.

8. Manoj Kumar Yadav, Son of Shyam Lal Yadav, resident of Mohalla - Chhotaki Delha, P.S. - Delha, District - Gaya.

9. Shankar Tiwari Son of Krishna Tiwari (Since dead)

10. Santosh Kumar Sinha Son of Sri Baban Prasad (Since Dead) ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Nagendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Md. Khurshid Alam -AAG 12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 28-03-2018 Against the order passed in Civil Review No.188 of 2015 on 10.01.2018, this appeal has been filed under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent.

On a perusal of the order passed and the material available on record, it is clear that Civil Review No.188 of 2015 was passed seeking review/recall of an order dated 14.07.2015

Patna High Court LPA No.206 of 2018(2) dt.28-03-2018 2/2 passed in CWJC No.15763 of 2010 and after considering the grounds raised in the review application, the learned Writ Court has only held that review of a judgment is not permissible, there is no error or glaring omission or patent mistake apparent on the face of record and the review has been dismissed. That being so, against such an order of rejection, Letters Patent Appeal is not maintainable. Petitioners, if aggrieved are required to challenge the original order dated 14.07.2015 passed in CWJC No.15763 of 2010, if permissible in law. With the aforesaid liberty to the petitioners, the matter stands disposed of.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ) ( Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Sunil/- U