Allowed

Kauleshwar Koiri v. State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC1 Apr 2015CWJC/8698/1995

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged an order under the Consolidation Act that allegedly affected his land plot. The High Court held that the authority failed to afford an opportunity of hearing before relying on an enquiry report and set aside the order.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 12.09.1995 set aside and matter remanded to appropriate authority for fresh decision after providing opportunity of hearing.

Kauleshwar Koiri Vs State of Bihar and… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Patna HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8698 of 1995

¶3

=========================================================== Kauleshwar Koiri, Son of Ram Sewak Koiri, resident of Village- Chanda, PostArak, Police Station- Brahampur, District- Buxar.

¶4

.... .... Petitioner.

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar 2. Director Consolidation, Bihar, Patna. 3. Deputy Director Consolidation, District- Bhojpur. 4. Assistant Deputy Director Consolidation, District- Bhojpur. 5. Consolidation Officer, Anchal Brahampur. 6. Dahari Yadav, Son of Sheo Deni Yadav, resident of Village- Chanda, PostArak, Police Station- Brahampur, District- Buxar

¶7

.... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. RAM NARESH SHARMA For the Respondent/s : Mr. (GP2) Mr. Subhash Chandra Yadav Mr. (Ga2)

¶8

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 01-04-2015

¶9

The petitioner prays for setting aside the order dated 12.09.1995, passed by Research Officer, in Revision Case No. 1223 of 1994 under Section 35 of the Consolidation Act for making correction in Survey Map in respect to R.S. Plot no. 17.

¶10

The case of the respondent is that some area of C.S. plot no. 475, Revisional Survey plot no. 17 has wrongly been amalgamated in Revisional Survey plot no. 16, which belongs to the petitioner.

¶11

The petitioner submits that when the case was reserved for order, the Research Officer called for the report from the Assistant Consolidation Officer. Subsequently, the Research Officer has passed

¶12

Patna High Court CWJC No.8698 of 1995 dt.01-04-2015

¶13

2 / 2

¶14

the impugned order after taking into consideration the enquiry report of Assistant Consolidation Officer without providing an opportunity to meet the findings recorded in the enquiry report.

¶15

I find that the Consolidation authority ought to have heard the petitioner, if the order was to be based on enquiry report, which was called at the time of reserving the order.

¶16

In the result, this writ petition succeeds. The impugned order dated 12.09.1995 is set aside and the matter is remanded to appropriate authority for fresh decision after providing an opportunity of hearing to both sides.

¶17

This application stands allowed.

¶18

(Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)

¶19

Uday/-

¶20

Kauleshwar Koiri v. State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kauleshwar Koiri v. 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

Dr. mrs. Kalpana Sinha Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

Dr. Lal Bahadur Roy and Ors. Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

Praveen Kumar Vs the State Bank of India and Ors.

Deo Narayan Turi and Anr. Vs State of Bihar and Ors.

Bhothri Das Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Prabhat Kumar Singh and Anr. Vs State of Bihar and Ors.