Patna High CourtC. REV./85/2015disposed

Bibi Hasina Begum v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2015-07-02Mr. Justice Vikash Jain,The Chief Justice2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Review No.85 of 2015 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 14067 of 2014 ====================================================== Bibi Hasina Begum, wife of late Kudrat Hussain, resident of Kudrat Market , Near Block Government Hospital, Basantpur, Police station- Basantpur, District - Siwan.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Collector-cum-District Magistrate , Siwan.

3. The District Development Commissioner, Siwan.

4. The Circle Officer, Basantpur Prakhand , District Siwan.

5. The Station House Officer, Basantpur Police station, District Siwan

6. Mukhiya Basantpur Panchayat, P.s Basantpur, Distt- Siwan.

7. Damodar Singh son of late Mathura Singh resident of Bithuna, P.s Basantpur, District Siwan.

8. Md. Yusuf@Babloo son of Kudrat Hussain resident of Kudrat Market , Near Block GovernmHospital, Basantpur, Police station- Basantpur, District - Siwan.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajendra Narayan, Sr. Advocate Ms. Anju Kumari @ Anju Narain For the State : Mr. Ashok Kumar Keshri, AAG 11 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 02-07-2015 This application is filed with a prayer to review the order dated 23.3.2015 passed by this Court in CWJC No.14067 of 2014. The reasons of the review petition is that in the name of implementing the order in CWJC No. 14067 of 2014, the respondents are trying to evict the petitioner.

Patna High Court C. REV. No.85 of 2015 (2) dt.02-07-2015 2/2 Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

The necessity to deal with the matter in detail is obviated on account of the fact that in the enquiry for removing of encroachments, it is said to have been found that there is no encroachment at all. In that view of the matter, the petitioner cannot have any renewed grievance.

We, therefore, close this Civil Review application. (L. Narasimha Reddy,CJ) (Vikash Jain, J) mrl U