Dismissed

Shambhu Singh v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC15 Dec 2015CWJC/19451/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This interlocutory order allowed substitution of parties after the original petitioner died during the pendency of the writ petition. On merits, the Court dismissed the writ petition as maintainable due to the existence of alternative statutory remedies available to the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for substitution allowed. Main writ petition dismissed; liberty granted to approach the statutory revisional authority.

Shambhu Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Patna HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19451 of 2013 With

¶2

Interlocutory Application No.9100 of 2015

¶3

====================================================== Shambhu Singh, S/O Late Ram Briksh Singh, ofVillage Kaiyatar, P.OMow, Police Station- Konch, District- Gaya, At Present CDA Colony, Lal Bahadur Shastri Nagar, Patna.

¶4

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Additional Collector, Revenue, Patna.

¶5

The Land Reforms, Deputy Collector, Patna.

¶6

The Anchal Adhikari, Sadar,Patna.

¶7

Ranjeet Singh S/O Late Prabhu Narain Singh Mohalla Saristabad Rajputana, Police Station- Gardanibagh, District- Patna. 6. Mukesh Singh S/O Sri Kamlesh Kumar Village Sewanan Police StationKarauna, District- Jehanabad. 7. Smt. Sharda Devi W/O Shri Kamlesh Kumar Singh Resident Of Village Sewanan Police Station- Karauna, District- Jehanabad. 8. Sunil Kumar S/O Late Shyama Rai Resident Of Mohalla Dujra Chak, Post Office And P.O- Patna, Police Station- Budha Colony, Distt- Patna. 9. Smt. Anju Kumari W/O Shri Amarnath Sharma Resident Of MohallaSaristabad, West Tola, Police Station- Gardanibagh, Distt- Patna.

¶8

.... .... Respondent/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Chandra Sen Prasad Singh, Adv. For the Respondent nos.1to4 : Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, AC to SC-30 For the Private Respondent nos.7to9 : Mr.Atul Kumar Pandey, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶10

4 15-12-2015 I.A.No.9100 of 2015

¶11

The instant Interlocutory Application has been filed purportedly on behalf of the heirs and legal representatives of the sole writ-petitioner Shambhu Singh stating therein that during the pendency of the present writ petition sole petitioner died on 22.12.2014 leaving behind his heirs and legal representatives, fully detailed in paragraph 2 of the present Interlocutory Application, who all are major and have entered appearance through their lawyer by filing their duly executed vakalatnama.

¶12

Patna High Court CWJC No.19451 of 2013 (4) dt.15-12-2015

¶13

¶14

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents do not raise any objection to the prayer for substitution made in the instant Interlocutory Application.

¶15

In above view of the matter, the prayer for substitution is allowed. Let the name of the deceased petitioner be expunged from the array of the parties of the main writ petition and be substituted by his heirs and legal representatives, fully detailed in paragraph 2 of the present Interlocutory Application.

¶16

The present Interlocutory Application stands allowed

¶17

to the extent indicated above.

¶18

CWJC No.19451 of 2013

¶19

With the consent of the parties, the main writ petition has been taken up for consideration on merits.

¶20

The original writ petitioner has filed the present writ petition assailing the validity and correctness of the order dated 09.07.2013 passed in Mutation Appeal Case No.67 of 2012-13 by the respondent D.C.L.R., Patna Sadar, as contained in Annexure12, whereby the aforesaid mutation appeal filed on behalf of the private respondents was allowed and the order dated 24.03.2012 passed by the Anchal Adhikari, Patna Sadar was set aside.

¶21

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, at the very threshold, has raised the question of maintainability of the present writ petition at this stage. According to them, against the impugned appellate order, the petitioner has an alternative and efficacious remedy before the revisional authority prescribed under the provisions of The Bihar Land Mutation Act, 2011 (in short ‘Act, 2011’). Therefore, according to them, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on that ground alone.

¶22

Patna High Court CWJC No.19451 of 2013 (4) dt.15-12-2015

¶23

¶24

The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents appear to be correct. In fact, against the impugned appellate order, the petitioner has two alternative remedies: firstly, he has remedy of revision as provided under Section 8 of the Act, 2011; and secondly, after the revision application is decided by the prescribed revisional authority, the aggrieved person will have further remedy before the learned Bihar Land Tribunal, Patna in view of the provisions contained in Section 9 of The Bihar Land Tribunal Act, 2009.

¶25

It is well settled that the issues of facts must be raised and conclusively decided by the statutory authorities, at the first instance, and only thereafter powers of judicial review of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India may be invoked.

¶26

In above view of the matter, the present writ petition is dismissed.

¶27

However, a liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the statutory revisional authority for grant of appropriate relief(s) with respect to the lands under dispute as also with respect to the appellate order impugned in the present proceeding.

¶28

(Birendra Prasad Verma, J)

¶29

Arvind/-

¶30

Shambhu Singh v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shambhu Singh 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

Pashupati Nath Mishra Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Firoz Shah and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Arun Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Most. Husana Khatoon Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Sarvajeet Kumar Gayee Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Mahesh Rai and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.