Allowed

Ghanshyam Agrawal v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC5 Jan 2016CWJC/23563/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the writ application and quashed orders passed by the Deputy Collector and Divisional Commissioner under the Bihar Land Dispute Resolution Act 2009, holding that the authorities lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate the title dispute in the presence of a pending civil suit.

What did the court decide?

The writ application is allowed; the impugned orders dated 26.03.2012 and 25.10.2012 are quashed and set aside.

Ghanshyam Agrawal Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.23563 of 2012

¶3

=========================================================== 1. Ghanshyam Agrawal Son Of Late Sitaram Agrawal Resident Of Village Sanhoula, P.S. and P.O. Sanhoula, District Bhagalpur

¶4

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus

¶5

The State Of Bihar

¶6

The Commissioner, Bhagalpur Division, Bhagalpur

¶7

The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Kahalgaon, District Bhagalpur

¶8

The Circle Officer, Sanhoula, District Bhagalpur 5. Purushottam Kumar Agarwal Son Of Late Bishwanath Prasad Agarwal Resident Of Village Sanhoula, P.S. and P.O. Sanhoula, District Bhagalpur

¶9

Sanajay Agrawal Son Of Late Bishwanath Prasad Agarwal Resident Of Village Sanhoula, P.S. and P.O. Sanhoula, District Bhagalpur

¶10

.... .... Respondent/s

¶11

=========================================================== Appearance :

¶12

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. BIMLENDU MISHRA For the Respondent/s : Mr. Prabhat Ranjan, A.C. to G. P. 12.

¶13

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL JUDGMENT

¶14

Date: 05-01-2016

¶15

In spite of notice no one has appeared on behalf of the

¶16

private contesting respondents.

¶17

The writ application assails the order(s) dated 26.03.2012 passed by respondent no. 3, Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Kahalgaon in Bihar Land Dispute Resolution Case No. 229 of 2011-12 (annexure- 2) as also the appellate order dated 25.10.2012 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Bhagalpur Division, Bhagalpur in Bhagalpur Misc. (Land Dispute Resolution) Appeal Case No. 37 of 2012-13 (annexure-3).

¶18

Respondent nos. 5 and 6 approached the Deputy

¶19

Patna High Court CWJC No.23563 of 2012 dt.05-01-2016

¶20

¶21

Collector Land Reforms, Kahalgaon raising a grievance with respect to the said land alleging therein that it was the applicants who had title over the land and the writ petitioner illegally encroached thereupon. A prayer for demarcation and removal of encroachment was made. Notice was issued to which the writ petitioner did not respond. The respondent Deputy Collector Land Reforms allowed the application vide order dated 26.03.2012 (annexure-2). Aggrieved thereby the writ petitioner filed appeal before respondent Divisional Commissioner, Bhagalpur vide Bhagalpur Misc. (Land Dispute Resolution) Appeal Case no. 37 of 2012-13. No relief was granted to the petitioner. These two orders are impugned in the present writ application.

¶22

Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that the complex question of title was sought to be agitated before the forum created under the Bihar Land Dispute Resolution Act 2009 (shortly the Act). It is not the case of the respondents that the land was settled or allotted to them under any of the provisions set out in the said Act. Relying on the decisions in the case of Smt. Basmati Devi Vs. Smt. Anju Kumari reported in 2012(3) PLJR, 214 as also the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Maheshwar Mandal & another Vs. the State of Bihar & Others reported in 2014(3) PLJR, 281 , it has been contended that the authority under the Act has no jurisdiction to entertain such dispute

¶23

Patna High Court CWJC No.23563 of 2012 dt.05-01-2016

¶24

¶25

and adjudicate thereupon. Petitioner has already filed title suit No. 489 of 2011 in respect of the said land impleading the respondents as defendants in which they have already appeared. The impugned orders having been passed without authority of law merit to be quashed.

¶26

Learned counsel for the State having regard to the ratio laid down in the aforesaid two cases, has not disputed the contention of the petitioner.

¶27

Considering the submissions of the parties, I am satisfied that the orders passed by the original as well as the appellate authority under the Act are fit to be quashed and set aside. Presumably, filing of the suit by the petitioner which is being contested by the private respondents herein is also one of the reasons for not opposing the prayer made in the writ application.

¶28

Consequently, the writ application is allowed. Orders dated 26.03.2012 contained in annexure-2, as well as the appellate order dated 25.10.2012, contained in annexure-3, are quashed and set aside. No order as to cost.

¶29

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J)

¶30

Amin/-

¶31

Ghanshyam Agrawal v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ghanshyam Agrawal v. The 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ahsanul Haque Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Mahendra Sao @ Mahendra Pd. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Bihar State Bar Council Vs The Union Of India and Ors.

Sabita Kumari Vs Bihar School Examination Board and Ors.

Fair Price Dealers Association Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Lord Mahavir Jee Gauri Shankar And Other Deities Vs Ran Vijay Singh and Ors.