← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/20150/2018disposed

Sanjeev Kumar Sahu v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2025-09-23Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20150 of 2018 ====================================================== Sanjeev Kumar Sahu S/o Late Shyam Nandan Prasad Sahu @ Karu Sahu, Resident of Village- Sahu Parbatta, P.S.- Sahu Parbatta, District- Bhagalpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar and Ors 2.

The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Additional Collector, Bhagalpur.

4.

The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Naugachhia, District- Bhagalpur. 5.

The Circle Officer, Naugachhia, District- Bhagalpur. 6.

Pramila Sahu, W/o Late Shyam Nandan Prasad Sahu @ Karu Sahu, 7.

Anup Kumar Sahu, 8.

Pratul Kumar Sahu, Both Sons of Late Shyam Nandan Prasad Sahu @ Karu Sahu and Respondent no. 6 to 8 residents of Village Sahu Parbatta, P.S.- Sahu Parbatta, District- Bhagalpur.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Rishi Raj Sinha -Sc19 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 23-09-2025 Heard Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. The present application has been preferred: for quashing the notice dated 18.07.17 issued by Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Naugachhia in Mutation Appeal No. 36/2017-18 contained in Annexure-7 whereby and where under Private Respondent Nos. 6, 7 and 8, namely, Pramila Sahu, Anup Kumar Sahu and Pratul Kumar Sahu respectively has filed a frivolous case

Patna High Court CWJC No.20150 of 2018(2) dt.23-09-2025 2/2 being Mutation Appeal No. 36/2017-18 in the court of Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Naugachhia on 06.07.2017.

3. It has been informed by learned counsel for the petitioner that it has become infructuous and as such, he may be permitted to withdraw the petition.

4. Accordingly, the writ petition disposed of as infructuous.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U T