The Patna High Court dismissed a writ application seeking quashing of a merger order. The court held that the application could not be allowed due to insufficient pleadings, specifically the failure to produce orders from earlier cases referenced by the petitioner.
The writ application is dismissed in absence of sufficient pleadings.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3839 of 1993
====================================================== Nandlal Sah son of Late Shiv Sah, resident of village- Bishanpur @ Bishanpur Basant PS Saraiya District Muzaffarpur .... .... Petitioner Versus 1. State & Ors 2. Joint Director of Consolidation, Muzaffarpur 3. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Muzaffarpur 4. Consolidation Officer, Saraiya, Muzaffarpur 5. Ram Chandra Sah son of Khelawan Sah 6. Smt. Roshni Devi W/o Ram Chandra Sah 7. Smt. Basmati Devi W/o Rajdeo Sah .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. S. M. Iqbal Hasan Rahmani For the Respondents : Mr. Rajesh Kr. Sharma, AC to GP 2 Mr. Naresh Chandra Verma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 4 28-04-2015 This is an application seeking quashing of an order dated 03.01.1993 passed by Joint Director, Consolidation, Muzaffarpur whereby, he has quashed an order passed by the Assistant Consolidation Officer in Case No. 651/87 and has restored earlier orders passed with respect to same dispute, in case No. 39/ 484, 36/ 481 of 1987 and 40/465 of 1987. Despite repeated queries made by this court as to where are the orders passed in case No. 39/ 484, 36/ 481 of 1987 and 40/465 of 1987, learned counsel for the petitioner has not given any satisfactory reply nor intends to bring those orders on record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon certain judgements, i.e., 2001 (4) PLJR 495 (Punya Mani Devi & Ors. v. the State of Bihar & Ors), 2014 (1) PLJR SC 64 (Rohit
Patna High Court CWJC No.3839 of 1993 (4) dt.28-04-2015
2/2
Chauhan v. Surinder Singh) and 2014 (1) PLJR 322 (Subhamati Devi & Ors v. Awadhesh Kumar Singh) . However, such judgements cannot be applied in the facts and circumstances of the present case where the pleadings are insufficient.
This writ application is dismissed in absence of sufficient pleadings.
(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J)
BKS/U
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ application seeking quashing of an order can be allowed in the absence of sufficient pleadings to bring relevant orders on record.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Punya Mani Devi & Ors. v. the State of Bihar & OrsDistinguished¶4
2001 (4) PLJR 495 (Punya Mani Devi & Ors. v. the State of Bihar & Ors)
Rohit Chauhan v. Surinder SinghDistinguished¶4
2014 (1) PLJR SC 64 (Rohit Chauhan v. Surinder Singh)
Subhamati Devi & Ors v. Awadhesh Kumar SinghDistinguished¶4
2014 (1) PLJR 322 (Subhamati Devi & Ors v. Awadhesh Kumar Singh)
Nandlal Sah
State & Ors
Joint Director of Consolidation, Muzaffarpur
Deputy Director of Consolidation, Muzaffarpur
Consolidation Officer, Saraiya, Muzaffarpur
Ram Chandra Sah son of Khelawan Sah
Chakradhari Sharan Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
