The court held that the present writ petition is barred by principles of res judicata as it constitutes the third round of litigation regarding the same impugned order of the District Collector. The petition was dismissed with costs.
Writ petition dismissed with costs of Rs. 10,000/- to be deposited in Government Treasury, Bhagalpur.
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.15238 of 2014
======================================================
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate Mr.Surendra Kumar/Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent Nos. 1 to 5: Mr. Amaresh Kumar Sinha, AC to GA 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER
2 06-09-2016 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioners have filed the present writ petition assailing the validity and correctness of the order dated 09.08.2007 passed in Land Settlement Appeal No. 40 of 1999-2000 by the respondent District Collector, Bhagalpur, as contained in Annexure-3 to the writ petition, whereby the aforesaid appeal preferred on behalf of the private respondent no. 6 and others was allowed.
3. The learned AC to GA 1, appearing on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 to 5, at the very outset, submitted that against
Patna High Court CWJC No.15238 of 2014 (2) dt.06-09-2016
2/2
the impugned order, the petitioners had earlier moved before this Court in CWJC No. 15166 of 2007, which was dismissed by a Bench of this Court by order dated 04.03.2009 (Annexure-7). He further submits that subsequently the petitioners filed MJC No. 3158 of 2013 for modification of the aforesaid order dated 04.03.2009 (Annexure-7), but that MJC was also dismissed by another Bench by an order dated 08.07.2014 (Annexure-8). He contended that the present writ petition is completely barred by the principles of res judicata.
4. The submissions made by the learned State counsel is accepted and it is held that the present writ petition is barred by the principles of res judicata. This appears to be practically third round of litigation by the petitioners with respect to the same impugned order dated 09.08.2007 passed by the District Collector, Bhagalpur, as contained in Annexure-3 to the writ petition.
5. In above view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that this writ petition should not simply be dismissed, but it should be dismissed with a costs. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed, but with a costs of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand). The costs awarded against the petitioners must be deposited in Government Treasury, Bhagalpur, in favour of the State of Bihar within a period of three months from today, failing which the District Collector, shall be at liberty to realize the aforesaid costs in accordance with law.
(Birendra Prasad Verma, J)
Tahir/-
U
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the present writ petition barring itself by principles of res judicata as it is a third round of litigation over the same order.
Kapildeo Mandal
Bachhi Devi
The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Patna
The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Bhagalpur
The S.D.O. Naugachia, District Bhagalpur
The D.C.L.R. Naugachia, District Bhagalpur
Birendra Prasad Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
