Dismissed

Braj Raj Srivastava v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC12 Oct 2012CWJC/14940/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a district administration's decision to construct a community building on land claimed by the petitioner. The court observed that the application lacked merit and was filed for extraneous reasons, noting the administration's successful intervention in resolving community friction.

What did the court decide?

The writ application was dismissed as being devoid of merit.

Braj Raj Srivastava Vs the State of Bihar and Ors. — Property and Title | Patna HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14940 of 2008

¶3

====================================================== Braj Raj Srivastava son of Shri Ramadhar Prasad Shrivastava resident of Sargatia, P.S. Gopalpur, District West Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The District Magistrate, West Champaran, Bettiah. 3. The S.D.M., Bettiah Sadar, District West Champaran. 4. The Circle Officer, Chanpatia Block, Chanpati, District West Champaran. 5. Shri Dinesh Kumar, B.D.O., Majhaulia Block, District West Champaran. 6. The Superintendent of Police, West Champaran, Bettiah. 7. The S.D.P.O. Sadar, West Champaran. 8. The Officer Incharge of Mufassil P.S. Bettiah. 9. Shri Binod Prasad Son of Late Chhote Lal Prasad, resident of Lalgarh, P.S. Bettiah Mufassil, District West Champaran. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shri Prakash Srivastava Mr. Anil Kumar Mr. Rajeev Ranjan For the Respondent/s : Mr. (Gp4) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL ORDER 3 12-10-2012 The Court has serious reservation as to the motive behind which the present writ application has been filed by the present petitioner, who has described himself as a social worker, a practicing Advocate, a political activist as well as holder of a post in the office of what is known as Bhartiya Adhivakta Manch. He is aggrieved because the district administration has decided to construct a community building for public use at what is known as Lalgarh Tola Karnemwa over Khata No. 23, Plot

¶4

Patna High Court CWJC No.14940 of 2008 (3) dt.12-10-2012

¶5

¶6

No. 1299, which is supposed to be a Gairmajarua Malik land. Stand of the petitioner is that this land is being used by both the communities of Hindus and Muslims for 100 years for taking out Mahabiri Jhanda or Tazia procession. The District Magistrate and other authorities are basically by such act trying to deny the old age tradition and use of the property by the two communities.

¶7

Counter affidavit on behalf of the State has been filed where all the allegations made above have been denied. They have brought on record evidence to show that the land in question had always been a point of friction as well as law and order situation being created by certain mischievous elements. Because of the same the district administration in the peace committee meeting managed to resolve the issue between the parties and it was decided that some kind of building for Angan Bari Kendra will be constructed besides Primary health centre, school etc.

¶8

If the district administration by their intervention has finally brought about peace in the area and if majority of members of the peace committee had agreed to give up their claim or the old age tradition, then there is no reason why the Court should allow the petitioner benefit of nuisance making by keeping the issue alive through the present writ application. Any

¶9

Patna High Court CWJC No.14940 of 2008 (3) dt.12-10-2012

¶10

¶11

indulgence shown by this Court with regard to the issue will surely re-open litigation and tension which was sought to be un-done by the intervention of the administration and participation of the peace committee.

¶12

This Court is of the considered opinion that this writ application has been filed for extraneous reasons and not for any bona fide assertion of right in favour of any individual or community.

¶13

This writ application is dismissed being devoid of

¶14

merit.

¶15

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J)

¶16

Amin/-

Braj Raj Srivastava v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Braj Raj Srivastava v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Birendra Kumar Mandal Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Kapil Dev Yadav Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Dwarika Prasad Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Rakesh Kumar Singh Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Md.Murshid Alam Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Ram Janam Ram Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.