Disposed

Lalit Kumar Chaudhary v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC22 Aug 2024CWJC/12553/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged notices declaring him an encroacher and ordering vacation of raiyati land in Madhubani for construction of a Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan. Court directed him to file a detailed representation with documents before the DM Madhubani; DM to decide with hearing within six weeks. Status quo ordered till then; writ petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Status quo over the land until disposal of petitioner's representation; DM Madhubani to consider claim with hearing and pass reasoned order.

Lalit Kumar Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar — Landlord and Tenant | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12553 of 2024

¶2

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

¶3

Lalit Kumar Chaudhary, S/o. Lakshmi Kant Chaudhary, R/o Ward no. 6,Village- Mohanpur, P.O. Shripurhati, Via Bhowara, District- Madhubani.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The Director, Directorate of Land Records and Measurement, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶8

The District Magistrate, Madhubani.

¶9

The Circle Officer, Circle- Pandaul, Madhubani

¶10

The Revenue Officer, Pandaul, Madhubani

¶11

... ... Respondent/s

¶12

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

¶13

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Namrata Mishra, Advocate Mr. Ratanakar Jha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, AC to GP-17 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 22-08-2024

¶14

Heard Ms. Namrata Mishra, learned Advocate for

¶15

the petitioner and Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned Advocate for the State.

¶16

The petitioner is aggrieved by the notice, as contained in Memo No. 994 dated 08.07.2024 and Memo No. 1267 dated 24.07.2024, whereby the petitioner has been declared to be encroacher and thus directed to submit his explanation within three days and to vacate the land for construction of “Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan” . The petitioner

¶17

Patna High Court CWJC No.12553 of 2024 dt.22-08-2024 2/4

¶18

further seeks a direction to the Circle Officer, Pandaul not to disturb the possession over his Raiyati land situated in Mauza Mohanpur, Thana No.61, Khata No. 307 (Old)/ 627 (New), Khesra No. 1728 (Old) / 1865 (New) measuring an area of 17 decimals and Khesra No. 1728 (Old) / 1866 (New) measuring an area of 2 acres and 75 decimals situated in Panchayat Shripurhati North, District Madhubani over which the petitioner and his family members has been coming in peaceful possession for more than 100 years, having their right, title and possession.

¶19

Learned Advocate for the petitioner contended that the land, in question, has been coming in the name of Mohan Chaudhary, Bachchelal Chaudhary and Lakshmi Chaudhary, sons of Sitai Khawas, as is evident from Register-II, the copy of which is marked as Annexure-P/2. All the three brothers have paid rent up till 2023-24, the rent receipts have also been brought on record as Annexure-P/3. Despite the continuous possession for the last 100 years, the Government officials have taken a decision to construct a “Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan” over the raiyati land of the petitioner, without following any process of law.

¶20

By the impugned notices, the petitioner has been directed to submit his explanation along with the documents in support of his right, title and possession in relation to land, in

¶21

Patna High Court CWJC No.12553 of 2024 dt.22-08-2024 3/4

¶22

question, within three days. The petitioner along with others have filed a detailed explanation/reply before the Circle Officer, Pandaul and a request has been made to provide some more time to produce the certified copy of settlement/bandobasti, as was done by Darbhanga Maharaj, along with other relevant documents, but they are bent upon to dispossess the petitioner.

¶23

At this juncture, learned Advocate for the State submits that the petitioner is unable to produce any valid document in support of his right, title and possession over the land in question.

¶24

Considering the nature of grievance, this Court deems it apt and proper to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the petitioner to file a detailed representation along with the documents in support of his claim showing the right, title and possession over the land, in question, before the District Magistrate, Madhubani within a period of four weeks from today. In case, such representation is filed, the District Magistrate, Madhubani shall consider the same after giving opportunity of hearing to all the stake holders and pass a reasoned and speaking order preferably within a further period of six weeks, in accordance with law.

¶25

Till the disposal of the representation of the petitioner, there shall be status quo, qua the land, in question.

¶26

Patna High Court CWJC No.12553 of 2024 dt.22-08-2024 4/4

¶27

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition

¶28

stands disposed of.

¶29

(Harish Kumar, J)

¶30

uday/-

¶31

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	NA
Uploading Date	27.08.2024
Transmission Date	NA

Lalit Kumar Chaudhary v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalit Kumar Chaudhary 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abhiram Yadav @ Adhiram Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Renu Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Dilkhush Kumar @ Dil Khush Kumar @ Dilkhush Vs the State of Bihar

Muroul Block Fishermen Cooperative Society Ltd. and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Shamsha Khatoon Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Pankaj Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.