Single judge disposed of writ petition alleging illegal soil removal from petitioner's land. Court held disputed factual questions regarding land amalgamation cannot be decided in writ jurisdiction and granted liberty to file a civil suit for damages.
Disposed of with liberty to file appropriate suit for damage and compensation.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Patna High Court CWJC No.7448 of 2013 (2) dt.02-07-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7448 of 2013
====================================================== 1. Bhola Sharma S/O Late Nabab Singh R/O Village And P.O.- Ginjee, P.S.- Goshi (Hulas Ganj), Distt.- Jehanabad .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Secretary Gramin Karj Bibhag, Bishesaraiya Bhawan, Beli Road, Patna 2. The Chief Engineer Gramin Karj Bibhag, Bishasaraiya Bhawan, Beli Road, Patna 3. The Executive Engineer Gramin Karj Bibhag (R.E.O.), Jehanabad 4. The District Magistrate Cum Collector, Jehanabad 5. The Sub Divisional Officer Cum Assistant Engineer Gramin Karj Bibhag (R.E.O.), Jehanabad 6. Circle Officer, Ghoshi Block, Dist.- Jehanabad 7. The Contractor, Gramin Karj Bibhag (R.E.O.), Jehanabad Namely Dilip Kumar Singh S/O Late Nageshwar Singh R/O West Gandhi Maidan, P.O.+P.S.+Dist.- Jahanabad .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gopal Govind Mishra, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Pravin Kumar Verma, AC to SC-26 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANANDAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 02-07-2013 From the order of the Executive Engineer dated 04.10.2012, as contained in Anxure-5, it appears that the application of petitioner for compensation on account of digging out soil from his raiyati land on the ground that in between road and his raiyati land there was some public land from which the soil was taken out. The order shows that a report was submitted that the petitioner had amalgamated the Gair Majarua land with his raiyati land and was cultivating it.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is a
Patna High Court CWJC No.7448 of 2013 (2) dt.02-07-2013
wrong fact and there is no Gair Majarua land in between the road and the land of the petitioner.
These disputes are disputed question of fact which cannot be decided in a writ jurisdiction.
The writ application is accordingly disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate suit for damage and compensation, as he may be advised, in which he will be at liberty to produce evidence to establish that it was in fact his raiyati land
from which soil was cut for filling up the road.
(Jayanandan Singh, J)
Arvind/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether questions of factual dispute regarding land amalgamation can be decided in a writ jurisdiction.
Whether the petitioner can seek compensation through an appropriate suit instead of a writ petition.
Bhola Sharma
State Of Bihar
Jayanandan Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
