Md. Hasiruddin v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.25360 of 2013 ====================================================== Md. Hasiruddin, Son Of Late Tajmul Hussain, Resident Of Village - Dershana Tola Thapkaul, Police Station - Jokihat, District - Araria .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. The Collector, Araria

3. The D.C.L.R. Araria

4. The C.O. Jokihat Anchal, Araria

5. Md. Mojibur Rahman Son Of Late Shamsul Haque Resident Of Village - Dershana Tola Thapkaul, Police Station - Jokihat, District - Araria

6. Abdul Rakib Son Of Late Abdus Sattar Resident Of Village - Dershana, Police Station - Jokihat, District - Araria

7. Bibi Nadira Khatoon Wife Of Md. Washiqur Rahman Resident Of Village - Dershana, Police Station - Jokihat, District - Araria

8. Bibi Ashma Khatoon Wife Of Md. Safiqur Rahman Resident Of Village - Dershana, Police Station - Jokihat, District - Araria

9. Most. Wakila Khatoon Wife Of Rafiqueddin Resident Of Village - Dershana, Police Station - Jokihat, District - Araria .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anamul Haque, Adv. For the Respondent/s : None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-01-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. None appears on behalf of the respondents, though the name of the learned State counsel is printed in the daily cause list. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 13.10.2012 passed in Case No.13 of 2004-05 by the respondent D.C.L.R., Araria, as contained in Annexure-1, whereby the petition filed on behalf of the petitioner under Section 16(3) of The Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 (in short 'Land Ceiling Act'), on remand made by the Divisional Commissioner, has been rejected.

Patna High Court CWJC No.25360 of 2013 (2) dt.15-01-2016 Indisputably, against the order impugned, the petitioner has an alternative and equally efficacious remedy before the prescribed appellate authority under Section 30 of the Land Ceiling Act. Thereafter, the aggrieved person will have further remedy of revision under Section 32 of the Land Ceiling Act. After revisional order, if someone is aggrieved, then he will have another remedy before the learned Bihar Land Tribunal, Patna in view of the provisions contained in Section 9 of The Bihar Land Tribunal Act, 2009.

In above view of the matter, the present writ petition is dismissed, but liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the prescribed authorities, as indicated above, for redressal of his valid grievances.

(Birendra Prasad Verma, J) Arvind/- U