Most. Phulia Devi vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 4 October, 2016

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Patna High Court - Orders

Most. Phulia Devi vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 4 October, 2016

Bench: Birendra Prasad Verma

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                             Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12376 of 2015
                 ======================================================
                 Most. Phulia Devi, W/o of late Jageshwar Paswan, Resident of Village-
                 Sahasram, P.O.- Sahasram Via Biraul, Police Station- Biraul, District-
                 Darbhanga

                                                                         .... ....   Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
                 1.  The State of Bihar.
                 2.  District Magistrate, Darbhanga.
                 3.  Anchal Adhikari, Biraul, District- Darbhanga.
                 4.  Mr. Rajesh Kumar, the then Anchal Adhikari, Biraul, District-
                     Darbhanga at present, Co-operative Extension Officer, Patna City
                     Block, Patna City.
                 5. Mr. Dhir Balak Rai, the then Anchal Adhikari, Biraul, District-
                     Darbhanga at present, Anchal Adhikari, Kursaila, District- Katihar.
                 6. Md. Suhail, Circle Inspector, Biraul, District- Darbhanga.
                 7. Dilip Singh, Anchal Amin, Biraul Anchal, District- Darbhanga.
                 8. Mr. Bhola Yadav, Halka Karmchari, Mauza-Sahasram, Village-
                     Sahasram Via + P.S.- Biraul, District- Darbhanga.
                 9. Bachu Paswan, s/o Late Lilekhan Paswan.
                 10. Ram Kripal Paswan, s/o Late Lilekhan Paswan.
                 11. Shiv Paswan, s/o Late Lilekhan Paswan.
                 12. Upendra Paswan, s/o Late Anup Paswan.
                 13. Triveni Paswan, s/o Late Anup Paswan.
                 14. Siyaram Paswan, s/o Late Madhukar Paswan.
                 15. Nathuni Paswan, s/o Late Madhukar Paswan.
                 16. Ram Padarath Paswan, s/o Late Madhukar Paswan. Resopndent No. 9 to
                     16 are Resident of Village + P.O.- Sahasram, P.S. + Via Biraul, District-
                     Darbhanga

                                                                     .... .... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s         : Mr. Satish Chandra Jha, Adv.
                 For the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: Mr. Dhirendra Kumar, AC to AAG-6
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA
                 ORAL ORDER

2   04-10-2016

Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as also the learned AC to AAG-6 appearing on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 to 3.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned letter/ communication dated 10.1.2015 of the respondent Anchal Adhikari, Biraul addressed to the respondent District Collector, Patna High Court CWJC No.12376 of 2015 (2) dt.04-10-2016 2/3 Darbhanga, as contained in Annexure-1 to the writ petition, in compliance of the order dated 26.6.2016 passed in CWJC No. 1399 of 2014, whereby recommendation has been made for cancellation of Basgit parcha issued in favour of the petitioner.

Apparently, in the light of the aforesaid recommendation, final order has not been passed by the respondent District Collector, Darbhanga for cancellation of homestead parcha of the petitioner. Neither the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner nor the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State are in position to inform the Court that the matter has finally been concluded by the respondent District Collector, Darbhanga. According to the respondent Anchal Adhikari, Biraul, the document/ basgit parcha issued in favour of the petitioner is suspicious and disputed one. Evidently, the claim raised on behalf of the petitioner in the present writ petition is based on certain disputed question of fact.

In above view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that instead of deciding the above disputed question of facts in the present proceeding, interest of justice shall be sub-served if the petitioner is granted liberty to raise all the issues of facts before the respondent District Collector, Darbhanga, who shall record his own conclusion about validity or otherwise of issuance of basgit parcha in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent District Collector, Darbhanga with a certified copy of the present order within a period of one month from today, whereafter the respondent District Collector, Darbhanga shall proceed to decide the claim of the petitioner in the light of the impugned letter dated 10.1.2015 (Annexure-1) issued by the respondent Anchal Adhikari, Biraul.

Patna High Court CWJC No.12376 of 2015 (2) dt.04-10-2016 3/3

However, before passing any final order, either accepting the claim or rejecting the claim of the petitioner, reasonable opportunity of hearing must be given to her as also the private respondent nos. 9 to 16, besides others, if any.

The writ petition stands finally disposed of with the observations and directions made above.

(Birendra Prasad Verma, J) BTiwary/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Patna High Court - Orders