← Library
Patna High CourtMJC/2691/2019disposed

Manoj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2023-07-26Mr. Justice Sudhir Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2691 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4830 of 2019 ====================================================== Manoj Kumar, aged about 35 years (M), Son of Banarsi Sah, Resident at Sugauli Bazar, Ward No. 7, P.S.- Sugauli, District- East Champaran, Motihari. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna Sri Brijesh Mehrotra. 2.

Sri Brijesh Mehrotra, The Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Dept., Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3.

Sri Raman Kumar, The District Magistrate, Motihari, District- East Champaran, Motihari.

4.

Sri Sudhir Kumar, The Sub Divisional Officer, Motihari, District- East Champaran.

5.

Sri Gyan Prakash Triphis, The Circle Officer, Sugauli, District- East Champaran, Motihari.

6.

Sri Braj Kishor Sah, aged about 22 years (M), Son of Bhikhari Sah, Resident at Sugauli Bazar, Ward No.7, P.S.- Sugauli, District- East Champaran, Motihari.

... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Gupta, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Md. Khurshid Alam, A.A.G. 12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 26-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. A show cause has been filed on behalf of the opposite party nos. 3 to 5 in which it has been stated that in compliance of the order dated 12.03.2019, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 4830 of 2019, a final order dated 03.02.2020 has been passed under Section 4 of the Bihar Land Dispute Resolution

Patna High Court MJC No.2691 of 2019(2) dt.26-07-2023 2/2 Act, 2009, annexed as Annexure-A to the show cause filed on behalf of the opposite party nos. 3 to 5.

3. Considering the aforesaid fact, no further order is required to be passed in the present contempt application.

4. Accordingly, the present contempt application stands disposed of.

(Sudhir Singh, J) U.K./- U T