Sonalal Prasad @ Sonalal Prasad Gupta v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21235 of 2018 ====================================================== Sonalal Prasad @ Sonalal Prasad Gupta S/o Late Shawaminath Prasad R/o Village- Matiyariya, P.S.- Harshidhi, District Motihari ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar and Ors 2.

The District Magistrate, East Champaran Motihari 3.

The Land Reform Officer Areraj, East Champaran 4.

The Sub- Divisional officer, Harshidhi, East Champaran 5.

The Circle Officer, Harshidhi, East Champaran 6.

Surendra Singh S/o Kishori Singh R/o Village- Matiyariya, P.S.- Harshidhi, District- Motihari East Champaran ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Vivekanand Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 14-10-2025 Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Vivekanand Singh representing the State.

2. The present writ petition has been preferred for the following relief(s):- filed for set aside the order dated 10.1.2014 passed by the Land reforms officer Areraj (Respondent-3) in land disputes resolution no. 164/12-13 which based on the erroneous fact and issuing direction to Cricle Officer, Harsidhi, East Champaran (respondent no. 5) measuring of land in question in Khatta no. 22 Khesara no. 1872 area 5 Katta 15 dhur Situated at village Matiyariya P.S. Harshidhi said land obtain to Bettian Rai is 1920 and any other

Patna High Court CWJC No.21235 of 2018(2) dt.14-10-2025 2/2 relief/relief which the Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper and the petitioner is entitled to.

3. A counter affidavit has come to be filed on behalf of respondent nos. 2, 3 and 5 and learned State counsel has taken to paragraph 6 which read as follows:

That as per section 14 of BLDR Act any party aggrieved by the order passed by the Competent Authority (DCLR) may file an appeal before the Commissioner of the Division concerned within a period of thirty days from the date of the order yet the writ jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court has been invoked. As such this writ application is liable to be dismissed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he shall be taking appropriate steps in accordance with law to approach the competent authority.

5. Granting said liberty and if such petition is filed in next eight weeks, the concerned authority shall see to it that the matter was pending before this Court for seven years before deciding the limitation petition, the writ petition is disposed of. (Rajiv Roy, J) Raj Ranjan/- U T