The Letters Patent Appeal was dismissed regarding a land reform matter. The High Court held there were no adequate materials to declare the appellant a Bataidar, upheld the lower courts' findings, and refused interference.
The Letters Patent Appeal against the Single Judge's order dismissing the writ applications was dismissed.
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
Letters Patent Appeal No.1388 of 2014 IN
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 3509 of 2014
=========================================================== Gopi Nath Tuddu son of late Dulla Tuddu resident of village Kajara, Tola Dohiya Bari, P.S. Mirganj, Distt. Purnea.
.... .... Appellant
Versus
.... .... Respondents
=========================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.
=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI
and
HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date: 04-05-2017
By a common order dated 13.05.2014 six writ
applications were clubbed together because they arose out of same
identical question of fact and kind of common order emanating from
the level of the D.C.L.R. as well as the Collector, Purnea. Since the
appeal of the present appellant was also dismissed by the Collector,
who refused to hold him under raiyats (Bataidaar) , the writ
Patna High Court LPA No.1388 of 2014 dt.04-05-2017
2/2
application came to be preferred. The learned single Judge went through the order of the D.C.L.R. as well as the Collector and agreed with the concurrent finding that there was no adequate materials and evidence to hold and declare that the appellant was a Bataidaar .
When concurrent findings being what they are and nothing new emerging even in the memo of appeal, which can knock out those findings, the affirmance of the orders of the D.C.L.R. and the Collector and refusal to interfere with the same by the learned single Judge cannot be said to be bad law.
Appeal has no merit. It is dismissed.
(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J)
(Nilu Agrawal, J)
Pawan/-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAVDATE | N/A |
| UploadingDate | 05.05.2017 |
| Transmission Date |
N/A |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the learned single judge should interfere with the D.C.L.R.'s and Collector's findings that there was no evidence to declare the appellant as a Bataidar.
Gopi Nath Tuddu
The State of Bihar
Deputy Collector, Land Reforms
Fekan Mandal and others
Ajay Kumar Tripathi
Nilu Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
