Bibi Sakina @ Bibi Sakhina v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15160 of 2025 ====================================================== Bibi Sakina @ Bibi Sakhina Wife of Kabir @ Md. Kabiruddin, Resident of Parbheli, Durgaganj, PS Kadwa, District Katihar, Bihar 855105. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Collector, at Katihar, District Katihar.

3.

The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, at Barsoi, District Katihar. 4.

The Additional Collector, at Katihar, District Katihar. 5.

The Circle Officer, at Kadwa, District Katihar. 6.

Shekh Jainuddin, Son of Late Abdus Sattar, Resident of Village Parbheli, Pargana Kumaripur, PS Kadwa, Sub-Registry Katihar, District Katihar. 7.

Baharuddin, Son of Late Siddique, Resident of Village Parbheli, PS Kadwa, District Katihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jitendra Kumar Giri, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Ra Kishore Roy, GP (18) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 25-09-2025 This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner seeking the following relief:- "That this is the writ petition being filed before this Hon'ble High Court on behalf of the aforesaid petitioner for issuance of a writ in the nature of "Mandamus" commanding and directing the state respondent no.3 to dispose off restoration application filed on 22.01.2025 for recalling the order dated 10.07.2024 whereby and whereunder the state respondent no.3 has been pleased to terminate the Mutation Revision No. 282/2017 on account of non-prosecution of the concerned parties and as

Patna High Court CWJC No.15160 of 2025(2) dt.25-09-2025 2/2 such the order dated 22.07.2017 passed by the Deputy Collector Lands Reforms, at Katihar, District- Katihar in Mutation Appeal Case No. 57/2015-16 has been affirmed without going into the merits of the case".

2. Heard Mr. Jitendra Kumar Giri, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Raj Kishore Roy, learned GP 18 for the State.

3. The main grievance of the petitioner is that her restoration application dated 22.01.2025 filed for restoration of Mutation Revision no. 282 of 2017 (Annexure- P/4) is not being taken up and decided by the Additional Collector, Katihar, respondent no.4 and the same is running since 22.01.2025.

4. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and upon perusal of the averments made in this writ petition, this court is not persuaded to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this court to decide such kind of issue, however, respondent no.4 is expected to decide the petitioner's restoration petition at the earliest.

5. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of. (Shailendra Singh, J) BKS/- U