Md.Samim @ Salam v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2511 of 2012 ====================================================== Md.Samim @ Salam, S/O Md. Kamruddin, R/O Village - Phulot, P.S. Chausa, Distt. - Madhepura .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. The Collector, Distt. - Madhepura

3. The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Udakishanganj Distt. - Madhepura

4. Anchaladhikari, Udakishanganj, Distt. - Madhepura

5. Bibi Gulsan W/O Late Gyash Uddin Resident Of - Rahta, P.S. Udakishanganj, District - Madhepura

6. Sherab Chedi S/O Sherab Basir Marhum Resident Of Rahta, P.S. Udakishanganj, District - Madhepura

7. Md. Mukhatar Alam S/O Md. Jahid Marhum Resident Of Phanhan, Ujani Tola, P.S. Udakishanganj, District - Madhepura .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Adv. Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Gupta, Adv.

Mr.Deepak Kumar, Adv.

For the Respondent nos.1to4 : Mr. Sheo Shankar Prasad, SC-8 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 29-08-2016 Heard the parties.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 24.01.2012 passed in Mutation Appeal Case No.17 of 2011-12 by the respondent D.C.L.R., Udakishunganj, whereby the petition filed on behalf of the petitioner for impleading him as party in the aforesaid mutation appeal has been rejected.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, on oral instructions, submits that the aforesaid mutation appeal has been dismissed for want of prosecution. If the aforesaid submission made on behalf of the petitioner is accepted, then the present writ petition has become infructuous. Secondly, even if the aforesaid mutation appeal is

Patna High Court CWJC No.2511 of 2012 (3) dt.29-08-2016 restored, then also the petitioner has an alternative remedy of revision before the prescribed revisional authority in view of the provisions contained in Section 8 of The Bihar Land Mutation Act, 2011, but he has not exhausted the alternative remedy of revision available to him.

In above view of the matter, the present writ petition is dismissed, but a liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the prescribed revisional authority for grant of an appropriate relief to him, if the aforesaid Mutation Appeal Case No.17 of 2011-12 filed on behalf of the respondent no.6 is restored. (Birendra Prasad Verma, J) Arvind/- U