Patna High CourtCWJC/22507/2018dismiss for nonprosecution

Bipin Prasad @ Kumar And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2025-11-10Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.22507 of 2018 ====================================================== Bipin Prasad @ Kumar and Ors ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar and Ors ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Rishi Raj Sinha- Sc19 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 10-11-2025 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner though Mr. J.S. Arora, learned Senior Counsel representing respondent nos. 7 and 8 is present.

2. The present application has been preferred for the following relief(s):

(i) For quashing of the order dated 21.04.2017 of the Member, Bihar Land Tribunal, Patna in B.L.T. Case No. 479/2016, whereby and where under the case filed by the petitioners against the order dated 02.01.2015 of the Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Sheohar in B.L.D.R. Case No.

95/2013-14 and the order dated 02.02.2016 passed in B.L.D.R. Appeal No. 112/15 by the Divisional Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur has been rejected.

(ii) For quashing the order dated 02.02.2016 of the Divisional Commissioner,

Patna High Court CWJC No.22507 of 2018(3) dt.10-11-2025 2/2 whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order dated 02.01.2015 in B.L.D.R. Case No. 95/2013/14 has been rejected.

(iii) For quashing of the order dated 02.01.2015 of the D.C.L.R. passed in B.L.D.R. Case No. 95/2013-14, whereby the petition filed by the respondents nos. 7 & 8 has been allowed directing the Circle Officer to fix boundary of the land bearing Kheshra Nos. 727 and 728, Khata No. 117 and hand over the possession of the said land to the respondents no. 7 and 8 in presence of the Officer-in-charge, Sheohar Police Station.

v) For any other relief or reliefs to which the petitioner is found entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. This Court has taken note of the fact that the counter affidavit was served upon the learned counsel for the petitioner in the year 2019 and remains unanswered.

4. Despite call, since there is no appearance, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U