Madhup Kumar Verma v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8479 of 2017 ====================================================== Madhup Kumar Verma Son of Sri Yasodanand Prasad Verma, Resident of Village-D.K. Shikarpur, P.S.-Shikarpur, District-West Champaran Bettiah Bihiar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State Of Bihar 2.
The MemberBoard of Revenue, Bihar, Patna.
3.
The Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur 4.
The District Magistrate, Bettiah, District-West Champran 5.
The Additional District Magistrate, Revenue Bettiah, District-West Champran 6.
The Land Reform Deputy Collector, Bettiah, District-West Champran. 7.
Sri Vijay Verma 8.
Sri Vinay Verma 9.
Sri Binod Verma 10.
Sri Vimal Verma 11.
Sri Vivek Verma All are Sons of Late Singheshwar Prasad Verma Resident of Village-D.K. Shikarpur, P.S.-Shikarpur, District-West Champaran Bettiah Bihiar 12.
Sri Rajendra Prasad S/o Sri Ramanath Ram, R/o Village and P.S.-Mirganj, District-Gopalganj, Bihar.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Surinder Kumar, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Birendra Prasad Singh, AC to SC-19 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 02-12-2025 Heard the parties.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the grant of following relief(s):
"for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned
Patna High Court CWJC No.8479 of 2017(3) dt.02-12-2025 2/2 order/Judgment date 22.02.2017 contained in Annexure-6 passed by Learned Member of Administrative, Bihar Land Tribunal, Patna in B.L.T. Case No. 200 of 2015 whereby and whereunder the Learned Member has set aside the order dated 03.02.2015 passed in Celling preemption Revision Case No. 154 of 2013 and allowed the application filed by Respondent No. 7 to 11 and consequently upholding the right of Preemption of the Respondent No. 7 to 11."
3. Learned State counsel submits that it is a preemption matter and with the passage of time, the same has become infructuous.
4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of treating it as infructuous and as such, no further steps can be taken in the matter.
(Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U