Patna High CourtL.P.A/1438/2012disposed

Sheo Shankar Giri v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2015-08-07Justice Smt. Nilu Agrawal,Mr. Justice Navaniti Prasad Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1438 of 2012 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 13224 of 2012 ======================================================

1. Sheo Shankar Giri Son Of Late Punyadeo Giri Shevait Sri Shankar Bhagwan Das Ji, Asthapit Math, Lauriya, Tapa- Sonbal, P.S.- Govindganj, District- East Champaran At Motihari .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. The Collector East Champaran At Motihari

3. The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, East Champaran, Motihari

4. Circle Officer, Areraj, P.S. District- East Champaran, Motihari

5. Sunil Giri @ Sunil Giri Son Of Late Juglal Giri Resident Of Village Math Lauriya, P.S.- Govindganj, District- East Champaran At Motihari .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : M/S. Dronacharya & Vijay Kumar Singh No. 1 For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sanjeev Kumar Priaydarshi Sc17 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH) 07-08-2015 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State.

2. Having perused the order of this Court passed in C.W.J.C.No. 15443 of 2006 dated 8-8-2008 as also the order of this Court in the writ petition from which the appeal has been filed being C.W.J.C.No. 13224 of 2012 dated 27-7-2012, we find no infirmity in the order.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the

Patna High Court LPA No.1438 of 2012 (2) dt.07-08-2015 2/2 Collector had not appreciated the order of this Court, and the order of mutation to the prejudice of the writ petitioner-appellant was passed. All we can say is that this is merely an order of mutation, which is without prejudice to the rights of the parties. It would be open to either party to move the civil court of competent jurisdiction or any statutory authority for redressal of their grievance, and they would not be prejudiced by the order of the Collector in the mutation proceeding, and the court or the statutory authority will come to its own finding upon the facts, as brought before it.

4. This appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.

(Navaniti Prasad Singh, J) (Nilu Agrawal, J) BK.Roy/- U