Remanded

Subhas Prasad v. State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC21 May 2015CWJC/9711/1997

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ seeking refund of ₹24,900 deposited for land settlement which was rejected by the District Magistrate. The petitioner alleged non-issuance of settlement order caused crop damage. The High Court set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter to the Collector for fresh consideration.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 27.11.1996 set aside and matter remitted to Collector, Madhubani for fresh consideration.

Subhas Prasad Vs State of Bihar and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Patna HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9711 of 1997 ====================================================== Subhas Prasad, Son of Lal Babu Prasad, Resident of Barabazar, Madhubani, P.S. Madhubani, District- Madhubani. .... .... Petitioner. Versus 1. State of Bihar through Commissioner, Darbhanga Division, Darbhanga. 2. Collector, Madhubani. 3. Additional Collector, Madhubani. 4. S.D.O., Madhubani, 5. D.C.L.R., Madhubani. 6. Circle Officer, Pandaul, Madhubani. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravishankar Prasad Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. J. Rahman (Gp7) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMARENDRA PRATAP SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 21-05-2015 9 21-05-2015 The petitioner prays for setting aside the order dated 27.11.1996, passed by District Magistrate, Madhubani in Appeal (Misc. Sarirat) case no. 213 of 1989-90, whereby he rejected the application of the petitioner for refund of deposited amount to the tune of Rs.24,900/- for settlement of 6 Sairats, being the highest bidder.

¶2

The facts of the case in short is as follows:

¶3

An auction was held for settlement of 7 Jalkars for the period 01.10.1988 to 30.09.1989 on 28.12.1988. The petitioner was the highest bidder, but as the amount bided was less than reserved Jama, no settlement was made. Another auction of the same Jalkars for the same period took place on 04.02.1989 and

¶4

Patna High Court CWJC No.9711 of 1997 dt.21-05-2015

¶5

2 / 3

¶6

again the petitioner was the highest bidder, but as the amount bided was less than the reserve Jama, no settlement was made. Again on 07.04.1989, open auction was held for settlement of Sairat for three years, however, no one participated in the auction. On 10.04.1989, the petitioner informed the authorities that he is willing to take settlement of all the 6 Jalkars on compulsory deposit of amount for three years. On his request, he was directed to deposit half of the compulsory amount, which he did. On deposit of such amount, the Collector, Madhubani recommended for settlement for three years from 01.10.1988 to 30.09.1991 and the matter was forwarded to Commissioner, Darbhanga Division for final approval, but no Parwana was issued in favour of the petitioner.

¶7

The petitioner as such sought for refund of the amount deposited by filing appeal before the Collector, Madhubani, giving rise to case no. 213 of 1989-90. The petitioner in his appeal submitted that pursuant to deposit of half of the compulsory amount, he sowed Foxnut (Makhana), as the season was about to come to an end. It was the petitioner’s case before the Collector that since the Parwana was not issued to him, he was not able to utilize the usufruct and the crops were damaged by anti-social elements. The Collector, Madhubani, however, rejected

¶8

Patna High Court CWJC No.9711 of 1997 dt.21-05-2015

¶9

3 / 3

¶10

the application on the ground that since he had sowed the Foxnut (Makhana) he must have utilized that time. However, the case of the petitioner is that as Parwana was not issued and a case was instituted at the behest of the local Mukhia, he was not able to harvest the Foxnut (Makhana)”.

¶11

The State in its counter affidavit has not brought any material on record that the petitioner had actually harvested the Foxnut (Makhana).

¶12

In this view of the matter, the impugned order 27.11.1996, passed in Appeal Case No. 213 of 1989-90 is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Collector, Madhubani for fresh consideration in accordance with law.

¶13

This application stands disposed of.

¶14

(Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)

¶15

Uday/-

¶16

Subhas Prasad v. State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhas Prasad 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

Bindeshwari Rai and Anr. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Sri Haribansh Pandey Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Ramu Saffi and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Krishna Bihari Labh and Anr. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Baidya Nath Jha and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Shovanand Jha and Ors. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.