Saryu Prasad @ Munna Lal v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1828 of 2025 ====================================================== Saryu Prasad @ Munna Lal son of Shreechand Lal, Resident of VillagePakaribarawan, Hanuman Nagar, Police Station-Pakaribarawan, DistrictNawada. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate cum Collector, Nawada. 2.
The District Magistrate cum Collector, Nawada. 3.
The Additional Collector, Nawada.
4.
The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Nawada Sadar, Nawada. 5.
The Circle Officer, Pakaribarawan, District-Nawada. 6.
Meena Devi, Wife of Kishori Sao, Resident of Village-Pakaribarawan, Police Station-Pakaribarawan, District-Nawada. 7.
Kishori Sao, Son of Late Heeraman Sao, Resident of Village-Pakaribarawan, Police Station-Pakaribarawan, District-Nawada. 8.
Sitaram Sao, son of Late Mahavir Sao, Resident of Village-Pakaribarawan, Police Station-Pakaribarawan, District-Nawada. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Binod Kumar Singh, Advocate Ms. Vagisha Pragya Vacaknavi, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Standing Counsel (24) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 11-02-2025 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Learned Counsel for the State.
2. The present writ application has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the order dated 03.09.2024 passed in B.L.T. Case No.84 of 2023 along with B.L.T. Case No.85 of 2023, by which the learned Member (Judicial) has set aside the common order dated 14.10.2022 passed by the Additional
Patna High Court CWJC No.1828 of 2025(2) dt.11-02-2025 2/3 Collector, Nawada, in Mutation Revision No.17 of 2020-21 and 18 of 2020-21 and allowed B.L.T. Case Nos.84 and 85 of 2023.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has purchased the separate piece of land through registered sale-deed from the rightful owner. He has no concerned with the land purchased by respondent No.8 dated 25.09.1970. He submits that he is only concerned with the purchased land.
4. Learned Counsel for the State submits that the Court of B.L.T. has passed the order stating that admittedly Title Suit No.531 of 2019 and Title Suit No.170 of 2022 are pending over the land-in-question between the parties and on this ground taking help of Section 6(12) of the Bihar Land Mutation Act, he has set aside the common order dated 14.10.2022 passed by Additional Collector, Nawada, in Mutation Revision Nos.17 and 18 of 2020-21. Counsel for the State further submits that the finding of the B.L.T. is only that the dispute between the parties shall be the outcome of the Title Suit No.531 of 2019 and Title Suit No.170 of 2022 and the said outcome shall prevail over all previous orders.
5. In this view of the matter that the land-in-question is the subject matter of title suits, this Court without entering
Patna High Court CWJC No.1828 of 2025(2) dt.11-02-2025 3/3 into the merit and demerit of the case is not inclined to interfere in the said order. Therefore, the writ petition stands dismissed. The petitioner shall be at liberty to take any relief from the Court where title suit is pending.
(Dr. Anshuman, J) Mkr./- U