Most. Shanti Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11512 of 2024 ====================================================== 1.

Most. Shanti Devi W/o late Mohan Singh, R/o Vill- Brahmpur , P.S.- Ram Krishna Nagar, Distt- Patna.

2.

Pappu Singh, Son of late Anil Singh, R/o Vill- Brahmpur , P.S.- Ram Krishna Nagar, Distt- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar. 2.

The Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna. 3.

The Principal Secretary, Land and Revenue Reforms, Government of Bihar,Old Secretariat, Patna.

4.

The District Magistrate Cum Collector, Patna. 5.

The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Patna Sadar. 6.

The Sub Divisional Officer, Patna Sadar, Patna. 7.

The Circle Officer, Sampat Chak, Patna.

8.

Smt. Ratna Mishra, W/o Sri Arvind Mishra, R/o Vill- Hamid Nagar,P.O. Baghai, P.S. Goh, Distt. - Aurangabad.

9.

Sri Arvind Mishra, Son of Srin Ramakant Mishra, R/o Vill- Hamid Nagar,P.O. Baghai, P.S. Goh, Distt. - Aurangabad. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Radha Mohan Pandey, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mrs. Manisha Singh, AC to GP-7 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 05-08-2024 Heard Mr. Radha Mohan Pandey, learned Advocate representing the petitioners and Mrs. Manisha Singh, learned Advocate for the State.

2. The petitioners are apprehending their dispossession at the hands of respondent no.6, the Sub Divisional Officer, Patna Sadar who is said to have threatened the petitioners to face dispossession from 44 sahi 1⁄2 decimal land of plot no. 681, Khata No. 44, Mauza Brahmpur, Thana

Patna High Court CWJC No.11512 of 2024(2) dt.05-08-2024 2/2 No. 111 erroneously and illegally, invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

3. The petitioner also alleged that the action of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Patna Sadar suggest undue inclination in favour of respondent no. 2nd Set.

4. Learned Advocate for the State made a preliminary objection that the entire writ petition is based on apprehension of the petitioners which might be unfounded. Moreover, the allegation of malafide is levelled without making the respondent no. 6 as party respondent in personal capacity.

5. Considering the nature of grievance and taking note of the averments made in the writ petition, this Court finds substance in the statement of learned Advocate for the State.

6. However, in the ends of justice the writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Patna Sadar to take into consideration all the documents and the materials placed by the petitioners in support of their claim and bring it to its logical conclusion expeditiously.

7. The writ petition stands disposed of.

(Harish Kumar, J) supratim/- U