Patna High CourtL.P.A/508/2014dismissed

Santosh Kumar Mishra v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-03-22Justice Smt. Nilu Agrawal,Mr. Justice Ajay Kumar Tripathi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.508 of 2014 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 18952 of 2013 =========================================================== Santosh Kumar Mishra Son Of Late Badri Das Mishra Resident Of Piparpanti Road, P.S. Kasim Bazar, District - Munger .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. The District Magistrate, Munger

3. The Additional Collector, Munger

4. The District Khas Mahal Officer, Munger

5. Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Munger, Sadar (Munger)

6. The Sub Divisional Officer, Munger Sadar, Munger

7. Sardar Mahendra Singh, Mantri Shri Guru Singh Sabha, Gurudwara, Prabandhak Samiti, Munger .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr Rajeev Kumar Verma, Sr. Advocate Mr. Karuna Nath Sahay For the Respondent/s : Mr. K.K.Jha, AAG 8 Mr Amish Kumar, AC to AAG 8 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date: 22-03-2017 Heard counsel for the appellant and counsel for the State. Also perused the order dated 21.2.2014, which is under challenge in Letters Patent Appeal.

The order dated 18.6.2013 passed in encroachment case was challenged in the writ application. After hearing the parties, the writ application was dismissed by learned Single Judge on the ground that he has two remedy. One, to file an appeal against the order, which

Patna High Court LPA No.508 of 2014 dt.22-03-2017 2/2 is appealable, or to file a suit for declaration and because of those remedies, the learned Single Judge refused to exercise discretion under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This Court does not find anything illegal with such a view having been taken by the learned Single Judge in not entertaining the writ or passing any direction or order on the dispute. Since the order does not suffer from any infirmity, the Court would not like to interfere with the same. The appeal is dismissed. The appellant has freedom to choose his course of action as granted by the learned Single Judge.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) (Nilu Agrawal, J) sk AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 23.3.2017 Transmission Date NA