Petitioners challenged an order directing them to vacate specific land. The court noted that the writ petition was not pressed and the petitioners sought liberty to pursue alternative remedies.
None granted; liberty to avail other remedies is granted.
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.3888 of 2023
======================================================
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brij Nandad Prasad, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Singh, AAG-13 Mrs. Sunita Kumari, AC to AAG-13 ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER
"(i). That for issuance of writ in nature of certiorari to quash the order of the Collector -Cum- Forest Divisional
Patna High Court CWJC No.3888 of 2023(2) dt.09-08-2023 2/3
Officer, Banka contained in memo No. 1475, dated 18.10.2022 by which petitioners were directed to vacate and remove this encroachment over the lands appertaining to Thana No. 140, Plot No. 495, 496, 497, Khata no. 16, Rakwa 127.30 Acres in MouzaBhalua, Anchal Katoria, DistrictBanka.
ii. For issuance of quash writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the respondents not to disturb the petitioners by way of vacating and removing from this land as for which their ancestors were living them long years.
iii. For the lands and holding that petitioners deserve to remain in their houses along with their Children and they should not be disturbed by any way."
Patna High Court CWJC No.3888 of 2023(2) dt.09-08-2023 3/3
pressed.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
kanchan/-
U
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioners are entitled to remain in possession of the disputed land despite the impugned order directing them to vacate?
Whether the petitioners' request for an alternative remedy was accepted?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Urmila Devi
Bal Krishna Yadav
Kalavati Devi
Mungwa Devi
Fulmani Devi
Amba Devi
Mohit Kumar Shah
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
