Dismissed

Saleha Khatoon and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC26 Apr 2013CWJC/8668/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking to set aside a Collector's order cancelling a land settlement. The Collector cancelled the settlement of 23 acres because the petitioners were found not to be landless persons, exercising no judicial interference.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed with a direction to respondents to take action against erring officials.

Saleha Khatoon and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8668 of 2013

¶3

==================================================

¶4

Saleha Khatoon wife of Late Rahimuddin.

¶5

Zulekha Khatoon wife of Late Farmuddin.

¶6

Md. Junaid Alam @ Junaid son of Late Farmuddin.

¶7

Md. Moquuimuddin son of Late Farmuddin.

¶8

Md. Mohid son of Late Farmuddin.

¶9

Md. Afaque son of Late Sujaat Ali.

¶10

Md. Irfaan son of Late Sujaat Ali.

¶11

Md. Fazlue Rahman son of Late Sujaat Ali.

¶12

Sabera Khatoon wife of Islamuddin.

¶13

Noor Alam son of Late Sher Mohammad.

¶14

Mojibur Rahman son of Late Sher Mohammad.

¶15

Mehrun Nissa wife of Late Md. Jasmuddin @ Jamsuddin.

¶16

Akhtarun Nissa wife of Mohibur Rahman.

¶17

Md. Bhasatoo @ Bhasat son of Md. Mahammadin.

¶18

Nazrul Haque son of Late Md. Jasmuddin @ Jamsuddin. All Resident of Village – Kharoodah, Naya Basti, Gogaria, (Powa Khali), P.S. and District- Kishanganj.

¶19

.... .... Petitioners

¶20

Versus

¶21

The State of Bihar 2. The District Magistrate, Kishanganj.

¶22

The Additional Collector, Kishanganj.

¶23

The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Kishanganj.

¶24

The Sub Divisional Officer, Kishanganj.

¶25

The Anchal Adhikari (Circle Officer), Thakurganj Anchal District – Kishanganj.

¶26

The Circle Inspector, Thakurganj Anchal District – Kishanganj.

¶27

Halka Karamchari, Thakurganj Anchal District – Kishanganj.

¶28

Amin, Thakurganj Anchal District – Kishanganj.

¶29

.... .... Respondents

¶30

==================================================

¶31

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. A.K.Sinha For the Respondent/s : Mr. (G.A.-7)

¶32

================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶33

2. 26-04-2013 Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned A.C. to Government Advocate – V.

¶34

Petitioners, in the present writ petition, have

¶35

prayed for setting aside an order dated 24-09-2012 passed by

¶36

Patna High Court CWJC No.8668 of 2013 (2) dt.26-04-2013

¶37

2 / 3

¶38

the Collector, Kishanganj (hereinafter referred to as ‘Collector’) in Settlement Cancellation Case No. 01 of 20122013. By the said order, learned Collector has cancelled the settlement of land, which was made in favour of petitioners, vide Settlement Case No. 06 of 2008-09.

¶39

Learned counsel for petitioners submits that the Collector was not having any authority to pass such order, due to the reason that petitioners are in possession of land in question since about 30 (thirty) years and as such, they have got the occupancy right. He further submits that petitioners were landless persons and due to that reason, vide Settlement Case No. 06 of 2008-09, land was settled to petitioners.

¶40

Learned State counsel, while referring to impugned order, submits that it was noticed that illegalities were committed by the employees of the Circle Office, Kishanganj and as such, detailed report was summoned. After obtaining report, it was established that petitioners, in whose favour land was settled, were not landless persons. They are having adequate lands. Thereafter, notices were issued to the settlee and after hearing the parties, the

¶41

Patna High Court CWJC No.8668 of 2013 (2) dt.26-04-2013

¶42

3 / 3

¶43

impugned order was passed. It was found that petitioners were not landless persons and government land was settled in their favour. About 23 (twenty three) Acres of land were settled with the petitioners, who are members of three family. The learned Collector has also noticed illegality committed by the concerned employee(s) and as such, while cancelling the settlement, he has also passed an order for initiating proceeding against the concerned employees of the Circle Officer, Kishanganj.

¶44

After perusing the impugned order, the Court is of the opinion that the order of the Collector requires no interference.

¶45

The writ petition stands dismissed.

¶46

While dismissing the writ petition, it is desirable

¶47

to direct the respondents, particularly; respondent no. 2/District Magistrate, Kishanganj to take stringent action against the erring officials/employees of the Circle Office, Kishanganj.

¶48

(Rakesh Kumar, J.)

¶49

Anay

Saleha Khatoon and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saleha Khatoon and Ors. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chandra Mohan Pd Vs the Additional Member Board of

Jai Prakash Singh and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Harihar Pandey Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Asha Raut and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Sri Akshayabat Kumar Verma Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Chandrama Prasad Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.