← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/10258/2014withdrawn

Vidya Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-09-19Mr. Justice Birendra Prasad Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10258 of 2014 ====================================================== Vidya Devi wife of Late Jai Narayan Prasad Verma, resident of village Ramduttapatti, P.S and District - Supaul.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Collector, Supaul.

3. The Land Reform Deputy Collector, Supaul.

4. The Circle Officer, Supaul.

5. Siawar Prasad son of Late Raghunandan Prasad, resident of village Ramduttapatti, P.S. and District - Supaul.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Alok Kumar Sinha, Sr.Advocate Mr. Bhola Kumar, Advocate Mr.Ashish Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-09-2016 After some argument, the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present writ petition with a liberty to approach the prescribed authority under the provisions of Section 3 of The Bihar Land Mutation Act, 2011 (in short, Act, 2011) for grant of appropriate relief(s) to her with respect to lands in question. Permission is accorded.

The writ petition stands dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty aforesaid.

If an appropriate petition in the prescribed form is filed by the petitioner before the concerned Circle Officer within a period of two months from today along with a certified copy of the present order, then the concerned Circle Officer shall be obliged to initiate a mutation case under the provisions of the Act, 2011 and Rules made thereunder and shall further be obliged to dispose of the aforesaid mutation case strictly in accordance with law, but

Patna High Court CWJC No.10258 of 2014 (2) dt.19-09-2016 2/2 before passing any final order, reasonable opportunity of hearing must be given to the petitioner, the respondent no.5 and all other concerned persons including the other private individuals, if any. (Birendra Prasad Verma, J) Tahir/- U