Disposed¶33

Md Alauddin v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC5 Apr 2024CWJC/99/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CWJC No.99 of 2024, Rajiv Roy J, disposed 05-04-2024: notices dt. 11.07.2022 by Circle Officer Mansahi (Katihar) issued in names of dead ancestors held defective — petitioners free to ignore until fresh appropriate notices; ceiling proceeding case 12/74-75 and Board of Revenue revision order dt. 24.11.2003 (Revision Case No. 23 of 2001) referenced in reliefs but not adjudicated; land village Marangi Khata 82/Khesra 264 (32 decimals) settled vide settlement case 59/75-76; petitioners Md Alauddin, Musharaf Perwez, Akalima Khatoon, Md. Ishrafil vs State of Bihar et al.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief decreed; the writ petition was disposed of with the court recognising the petitioners' right to ignore the defective notice(s) until appropriate notice(s) are issued. ¶33

Md Alauddin Vs The State Of Bihar — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.99 of 2024

¶2

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

¶3

Md Alauddin Son of late Sher Mohammad Resident of village- Mirkaha, P.O and P.S Mansahi, District- Katihar.

¶4

Musharaf Perwez Son of Late Md. Naimuddin Resident of village- Mirkaha, P.O and P.S Mansahi, District- Katihar.

¶5

Akalima Khatoon Wife of late Md. Fazar Ali Resident of village- Mirkaha, P.O and P.S Mansahi, District- Katihar.

¶6

Md. Ishrafil Son of late Farjand Ali Resident of village- Mirkaha, P.O and P.S Mansahi, District- Katihar.

¶7

... ... Petitioner/s

¶8

Versus

¶9

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

¶10

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

¶11

District Magistrate-cum- Collector, District- Katihar.

¶12

Additional Collector (Revenue), Katihar, District- Katihar.

¶13

Circle Officer, Mansahi, District- Katihar.

¶14

... ... Respondent/s

¶15

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

¶16

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Raju Giri, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Governmnet Pleader (4) ======================================================

¶17

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

¶18

2 05-04-2024

¶19

Heard Mr. Raju Giri, learned counsel for the

¶20

petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶21

2. The present writ petition has been preferred for the

¶22

following reliefs:

¶23

(i) to issue an appropriate writ / order / direction, in the nature of certiorari for quashing the Notice dated 11.07.2022 issued by the Circle Officer, Mansahi, District- Katihar by which the

¶24

Patna High Court CWJC No.99 of 2024(2) dt.05-04-2024 2/3

¶25

said Notice has been issued in the name of dead person who is ancestor (late father and grand father) of petitioners and in whose name the land of village- Marangi bearing Khata No. 82, Khesra No. 264 (Area 32 decimals) were settled vide settlement case no. 59/75- 76 (as contained in Annexure-5);

¶26

(ii) to issue an appropriate writ / order / direction, holding that the entire proceeding of Ceiling Proceeding Case NO. 12/74-75 of DistrictKatihar especially the Order dated 24.11.2003 passed by the Board of Revenue of Bihar in the Revision Case NO. 23 of 2001 and subsequent Orders passed in the aforesaid Ceiling Case at the back of the petitioners after settlement of the land in their favour is not applicable and binding on the petitioners;

¶27

(iii) to issue an appropriate writ / order / direction, nature in of mandamus commanding the respondent District Magistrate, Katihar, not to disturb the possession of the petitioners from the land in question and also to force them to vacate

¶28

Patna High Court CWJC No.99 of 2024(2) dt.05-04-2024 3/3

¶29

their houses.

¶30

3. As per the statement of Mr. Giri, learned counsel for the petitioner that the notice(s) dated 11.07.2022 is/are addressed to the father of the petitioners who died and as such, the notice(s) issued against the dead persons is/are invalid.

¶31

4. Notice(s) is/are of July, 2022 and we are in April, 2024 i.e. more than 1 and ½ years has lapsed without any action by the respondents.

¶32

5. In view of the defective notice that has been issued, the petitioners are well within their right to ignore the same unless an appropriate notice(s) is/are issued.

¶33

6. The writ petition stands disposed of.

¶34

(Rajiv Roy, J)

¶35

Jagdish/-

¶36

Md Alauddin v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md Alauddin v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. Abdullah @ Abdullah Vs The State of Bihar

Sakaldeo Mukhiya Vs The State of Bihar

Pujesh Paswan Vs the State of Bihar

Satyendra Prasad Sharma @ Surendra Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

Jay Prakash Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Renu Devi Vs The State of Bihar