Allowed

Avinash Kumar Rai v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC10 Jan 2020CWJC/25788/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the withdrawal of a writ petition challenging the acquisition of land under the Bihar Land Reforms Act, permitting it only after filing a reply to the notice and initiating fresh proceedings under the newly added Section 30 of the Act.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition withdrawn; directed to file reply to notice and file fresh petition under Section 30 of the Bihar Land Reforms Act.

Avinash Kumar Rai Vs The State of Bihar — Landlord and Tenant | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.25788 of 2019

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Avinash Kumar Rai Son of Ram Priya Rai Resident of Village- North of Durga Mandir, Mohanpur, Police Station- Mohanpur O.P. (Patory), DistrictSamastipur.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Land Reforms and Revenue Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The Commissioner, Darbhanga Division, Darbhanga.

¶8

The Collector, Samastipur.

¶9

The Sub- Divisional Officer, Patory, Samastipur.

¶10

The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Patory, District- Samastipur.

¶11

The Circle Officer, Mohanpur, Patory, District- Samastipur.

¶12

... ... Respondent/s

¶13

======================================================

¶14

Appearance :

¶15

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr.Subash Chandra Yadav (GP15)

¶16

======================================================

¶17

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶18

2 10-01-2020 Heard both sides.

¶19

The petitioner filed this writ petition to quash the notice issued under the signature of Circle Officer, Mohanpur that Plot No.2949 Khata No.167 area 46 decimals situated in Mauza Mohanpur has already been acquired by the Notification No.271 dated 08.07.1997.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that mother of the petitioner purchased the land in the year 1960 from Mahanth Rameshwar Dasji. No notice was issued to the petitioner in the land ceiling case initiated against Mahant

¶21

Patna High Court CWJC No.25788 of 2019(2) dt.10-01-2020 2/2

¶22

Rameshwar Dasji. Petitioner is a bonafide purchaser.

¶23

After some argument, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this writ petition so that the petitioner may file reply to the notice as well as file fresh petition before the Collector under newly added Section 30 after deletion of Section 5 of the Bihar Land Reforms Act.

¶24

Prayer is allowed. This writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid direction.

¶25

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J)

¶26

Saurabh/-

¶27

Avinash Kumar Rai v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avinash Kumar Rai v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Priyanka Soni Vs The State of Bihar

Ajay Kumar Ram, Vs The State of Bihar

Dr. Shahina Shaukat @ Shahina Shaukat Vs The Chancellor of Universities of Bihar

Brijnandan Prasad Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Pradeep Kumar Bosak Vs The State of Bihar

Prakash Bir Sathi Vs The State of Bihar