← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/2793/2018dismissed

Bindhayachal Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-07-24Mr. Justice Madhuresh Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2793 of 2018 ====================================================== Bindhayachal Singh Son of Prabhu Narayan Singh R/o Village Masahi, P.O. Umapur, P.S. Bhagwanpur, District Kaimur at Bhabhua. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Cum Mines Commissioner, Mines, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Additional Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. Collector, Kaimur.

4. District Mining Officer, Rohtas, Sasaram.

5. District Mining Officer, Kaimur at Bhabhua. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Rewti Kant Raman, Advocate For the State :

Mr. K.K. Jha, AAG8 For the Mines Deptt.

:

Mr. Naresh Dixit, Spl. P.P., Mines ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 24-07-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Mining Department.

2. This writ petition has been filed praying for direction that the respondents be restrained from realizing the amount, Rs.2,29,032.25/- plus interest thereon, as petitioner has not operated the mining work since 03.12.1996 to 11.10.2004 over 74 decimals of land of the lease hold area. Paragraph-11 of the writ petition reveals that the dispute regarding petitioner's entitlement to conduct his mining activities on 74 decimals of land in Plot No.837 is subject of Title Suit No.202 of 2005 filed by the petitioner in the court of Munsif, Bhabhua.

Patna High Court CWJC No.2793 of 2018 dt.24-07-2018 2/2

3. Since the issue is directly related to the relief prayed for in the said suit, the petitioner would be entitled to his rights as per the adjudication of Title Suit No.202 of 2005. There is no occasion for this Court to exercise jurisdiction in view of the said suit.

4. The writ petition is misconceived and is dismissed. (Madhuresh Prasad, J) S.KUMAR/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 26.07.2018 Transmission Date NA