Shiv Narayan Sah v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2126 of 2015 =========================================================== Shiv Narayan Sah aged about 45 years, son of Baldev Sah, resident of Vill.- Jadiya, P.S. Jadia, Dist. Supaul.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Land Reform and Revenue Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Commissioner, Kosi Division, Saharsa.

3. The Collector, Supaul.

4. The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms Triveniganj, Supaul

5. The Circle Officer, Circle Office, Triveniganj, Jadiya, Supaul

6. Sukni Devi wife of RamjiSah Resident of Vill.- Jadiya P.S. Jadia, Dist. Supaul. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjit Jha For the Respondents : Mr. Yogendra Prasad Sinha AAG-15 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 03-02-2015 Heard the parties.

The petitioner has approached this Court with a limited prayer as is evident from the pleadings made in the writ petition as also the prayer incorporated therein.

The respondent No.6 approached the Deputy Collector Land Reforms invoking the jurisdiction of the Court under the Bihar Land Disputes Resolution Act,2009. The Deputy Collector Land Reforms after hearing the parties disposed of the said application by order dated 31.1.2012 (Annexure-3). Aggrieved thereby the petitioner filed the appeal before the respondentDivisional Commissioner,Saharsa vide Land Dispute Appeal no. 103 of 2012. It has been submitted that the said appeal has remained

Patna High Court CWJC No.2126 of 2015 dt.03-02-2015 2/2 undisposed of till today. It has, therefore, been submitted that the writ application be disposed of by directing the respondent- Divisional Commissioner, Saharsa to consider and dispose of the pending Land Dispute appeal no. 103 of 2012 in accordance with law as quickly as possible.

Learned counsel for the State, on going through the pleadings made in the writ application, has submitted that if an appeal has been preferred which has remained undisposed of till today, this Court may issue suitable direction.

Having heard the parties, the writ application is disposed of by directing the respondent Divisional Commissioner (respondent no.2) to dispose of the Land Dispute Appeal no. 103 of 2012, if not already disposed of, as quickly as possible preferably within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) Shyam/- U