In a civil writ petition regarding a land settlement order, the High Court dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioner had no legal right over the land and thus no locus standi to challenge the settlement granted to the landless private respondent. No costs were awarded.
No relief granted; writ petition dismissed without costs.
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.12350 of 2002
====================================================== Bhuwaneshwari Prasad son of Late Chandrika Prasad, resident of Mahalla Ganj No.2, P.O. Bettiah, P.S.Bettiah (Town), District West Champaran .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Collector, Bettiah 2. The Sub Divisional Officer, Bettiah 3. The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Bettiah 4. The Anchal Adhikari, Bettiah Anchal, Bettiah 5. Mr.Raghav Prasad son of Baldeo Prasad, resident of village Baijnath Pore, P.S.Bettiah (Muffasil), District West Champaran .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravindra Verma Mr. Shiv Kumar Dwivedy Mr. Rohit Mishra For the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 : Mr.Abbas Haider, SC 6 Mr.S.Hussain Majeed, AC to SC 6 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER
4 26-07-2016 The petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 10.11.2002 passed in Settlement Case No. 4 of 2001-2002 by the Sub Divisional Officer, Bettiah, as contained in Annexure-3/5 to the writ petition, whereby 23 decimals of land of plot no.354 has been settled in favour of the private respondent no.5.
After going through the pleadings of the whole writ petition, this Court does not find that the petitioner has any legal right over the land in question.
The learned SC 6, appearing on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 to 4, submits that in absence of any legal right to the petitioner with respect to the land in question he cannot be permitted to challenge the validity or otherwise of the settlement of the land in question in favour of the private respondent no.5 who is said to be a poor and landless person and as per finding he is in possession over the land in question for about 25 years.
Patna High Court CWJC No.12350 of 2002 (4) dt.26-07-2016
2/2
In above view of the matter, this Court does not find any good ground to interfere with the impugned order dated 10.11.2002 passed in Settlement Case No. 4 of 2001-2002 by the respondent Sub Divisional Officer, Bettiah (Annexure-3/5) as also the consequential parcha dated 10.11.2002. The writ petition is devoid of merit and is, accordingly, dismissed, but without costs.
(Birendra Prasad Verma, J)
Tahir/-
U
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner can challenge the validity of a land settlement in favor of a private respondent when the petitioner lacks any legal right over the land.
Bhuwaneshwari Prasad son of Late Chandrika Prasad
The State of Bihar through the Collector, Bettiah
The Sub Divisional Officer, Bettiah
The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Bettiah
The Anchal Adhikari, Bettiah Anchal, Bettiah
Mr.Raghav Prasad son of Baldeo Prasad
Birendra Prasad Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
