Shivji Rai v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6556 of 2018 ====================================================== Shivji Rai, Son of Late Devki Rai, Resident of village- Chandpura, P.S.- Raghopur, Dist.- Vaishali.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Department of Land Reforms, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur.

3. The Land Reforms Officer, Hajipur Vaishali.

4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Vaishali Hajipur.

5. The Circle Officer, Raghopur, Vaishali.

6. Devendra Bhagat, Son of Late Ramjee Bhagat.

7. Keshari Bhagat, Son of Late Lekha Bhagat.

8. Harinandan Rai, Son of Late Badai Rai.

9. Dhanraj Rai, Son of Late Balkishun Rai.

10. Saryug Rai, Son of Late Ram Khelawan Rai.

11. Bali Sharma, Son of Late Shyam Bahadur Sharma.

12. Jhagaru Bhagat, Son of Late Brahm Bhagat.

13. Jigal Rai, Son of Late Dhanraj Rai.

14. Ravideo Rai, Son of Late Bhagawat Rai.

15. Rameshwa Rai, Son of Late Bahadur Rai.

16. Harinandan Rai, Son of Late Bahadi Rai. All are Resident of villageJagdishpur, P.S.- Raghopur, Dist.- Vaishali. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Deep Nishi, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. S.C. Yadav, GP-15 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 09-08-2018 Heard Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AC to GP 15 for the respondentState. The matter has been listed before this Court, since the subject matter has wrongly been labelled as 'Land Encroachment and Demolition'.

The petitioner has prayed for a direction to the

Patna High Court CWJC No.6556 of 2018(2) dt.09-08-2018 2/2 respondent authority to execute the order dated 13.11.2014, passed by District Collector Land Reforms, Vaishali in Bihar Land Dispute Redressal Case No. 126 of 2013-14. Since there is specific provision under Section 15 of the Bihar Public Land Dispute Resolution Act, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for execution of the order by competent authority, this Court is not inclined to interfere. Accordingly, the present writ application is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to resort the provision under Sections 15 and 15 A of the Act.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion either on the merits of the case or on the order passed by DCLR, Vaishali.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) Amrendra/- U