Patna High Court - Orders
Richesh Anand vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 25 January, 2017
Author: Hemant Kumar Srivastava
Bench: Hemant Kumar Srivastava
Patna High Court CWJC No.18048 of 2016 (2) dt.25-01-2017 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18048 of 2016
======================================================
1. Richesh Anand son of Lakshmi Prasad Nayak, resident of mohalla-
Adarsh Nagar, Ward No. 16, Police Station and District Araria.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The Collector Araria.
3. The Sub- Divisional Officer, Araria.
4. The Anchal Adhikari, Block- Araria within the District of Araria.
.... .... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rama Nand Poddar
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sajid Salim Khan-SC 25
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR
SRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
2 25.01.2017Grievance of the petitioner is that he purchased some part of plot no. 1033 appertaining to khata no. 388 of Mauja Haria but the illegal proceeding for acquisition of the aforesaid land was initiated and the State authority fixed red flag on the land of the petitioner. Petitioner made protest and when the State authority realized that they had wrongly fixed red flag on the land of the petitioner, State authority took another turn and issued notice for cancellation of Jamabandi of the petitioner which is evident from perusal of annexure 9 to I.A. no. 9987/2016.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that operation of the aforesaid notice (annexure 9) should be stayed till disposal of this writ petition because issuance of the aforesaid notice is nothing but a mala fide act of State authority.
Learned Standing Counsel 25 appearing for the State submits Patna High Court CWJC No.18048 of 2016 (2) dt.25-01-2017 2 that even if notice for cancellation of Jamabandi has been issued malafidely, then also, petitioner has got remedy under law to challenge the aforesaid order and issuance of notice for cancellation of Jamabandi could not be subject matter of the present writ petition.
From perusal of annexure 9 to the I.A. no. 9987/2016 goes to show that the aforesaid notice was issued on 14.10.2016 but this writ petition was filed on 28.10.2016 but it is case of the petitioner that prior to issuance of notice State authority had fixed red flag on his land and when they came to know that Jamabandi stands in the name of the petitioner, Additional Collector, Araria issued notice on the basis of recommendation made by S.D.O, Araria vide letter no. 909 dated 24.9.2016 along with record no. 2/2016-17. The recommendation of S.D.O, Araria as well as his finding is not available on the record. However, in course of hearing, learned Standing Counsel 25 appearing for the State assures to this court that he shall bring the aforesaid recommendation and other materials on record within two weeks.
In view of the aforesaid submissions, let this matter be listed after two weeks for hearing on I.A. no. 9987/2016 under the same heading.
However, operation of annexure 9 shall remain stayed till further order of this court.
Shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) U T