Sheela Kumari @ Sheela Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17778 of 2023 ====================================================== Sheela Kumari @ Sheela Devi W/o Santosh Kumar, R/o Lakhnusarai, Ward No. 21, P.O. and P.S. - Sasaram, District - Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through Secretary, Department of Prohibition, Excise and Registration.
2.
The Inspector General of Registration, Department of Prohibition, Excise and Registration.
3.
The Collector (stamp), Rohtas (Sasaram).
4.
The Public Information Officer-cum-Deputy Collector, Law, Rohtas (Sasaram).
5.
The District Sub-Registrar, Rohtas (Sasaram). ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ajit Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr.Vivek Prasad (Gp7) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 14-05-2024
1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following relief(s):- "1(a) For issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondent Collector, (stamp), Rohtas (Sasaram) to return the original sale deed impounded in relation to Reference Case No. 07/2002;
(b) For issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondent District Sub-registrar to hand over the original sale deed to the petitioner after registering the same once it is returned by the respondent Collector (stamp);
Patna High Court CWJC No.17778 of 2023(2) dt.14-05-2024 2/2 (c) For issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondent authorities to register the photocopy of the sale deed as an alternate to the registration of the original sale deed, in case the respondent authorities have lost the same.
d) For a further direction to the respondent authorities to pay suitable cost to the petitioner for the gross negligence and deliberate inaction for more than seven years."
2. At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance of the petitioner has stood redressed, during the interregnum period, hence the present writ petition has been rendered infructuous, thus the same be disposed off.
3. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed off as not pressed.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Saurav/- U