← Library
Patna High CourtMJC/5043/2018dismissed

Birendra Sah v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2024-01-11Mr. Justice Mohit Kumar Shah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.5043 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11352 of 2017 ====================================================== Birendra Sah @ Virendra Kumar Sah, Son of Balershwar Sah, Resident of Village- Malinagar, P.S.- Chakmahes, District- Samastipur Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar.

2.

Sri Chandra Shekhar Singh, Collector, Samastipur. 3.

Sri Ubhay Pad Das, Circle Officer, Kalyanpur, Samastipur. 4.

Harilal Sah, Son of Late Paltan Sah, 5.

Sundeshwar Sah, Son of Late Babulal Sah, 6.

Namolal Sah @ Natholal Sah, Son of Late Sonela Sah, 7.

Ram Saran Sah, Son of Late Sonela Sah, 8.

Shankar Sah, Son of Late Sonela Sah, 9.

Arun Kumar Singh, Son of Jagdish Prasad Singh, 10.

Kedar Verma, Son of Late Chandeshwar Verma, 11.

Sambhu Verma, Son of Late Chandeshwar Verma, 12.

Nageshwar Verma, Son of Late Raghu Nandan Verma, 13.

Srinarayan Verma, Son of Late Raghu Nandan Verma, 14.

Maheshwar Verma, Son of Late Raghu Nandan Verma, 15.

Laxmi Verma, Son of Late Raghu Nandan Verma, Sl. No.04 to 15 are resident of Village- Malinagar, P.S.- Chakmahesi, District- Samastipur. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vinay Kumar Mishra,Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Khurshid Alam Aag 12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 11-01-2024 In compliance of the order of this Court dated 05.12.2017, passed in CWJC No.11352 of 2017, the final order has been stated to have been passed by the Circle Officer, Kalyanpur and it has also been pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the contemnors by referring to the show-

Patna High Court MJC No.5043 of 2018(3) dt.11-01-2024 2/2 cause filed in the present case that the encroachment in question has stood removed during the interregnum period, hence the present petition has been rendered infructuous. 2.

In view of the aforesaid, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in case of any subsisting grievance, the petitioner be granted liberty to seek redressal of the same by taking recourse to the due process of law. Liberty so sought is granted.

3.

The petition stands dismissed.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) kanchan/- U