Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

1935 DAILYLAW 2 (PAT)

Lallu Prasad v. The Tripurari Sharan,

MJC/1935/2021 · 2026-03-12

Rajiv Roy

body1935

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.1935 of 2021 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17240 of 2015 ====================================================== Lallu Prasad Son of Late Nand Lal, Resident of Mohalla-Main Road Daudpur, Police Station-Sahpur, Post Office-Daudpur, District-Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The Tripurari Sharan, the Chief Secretary, Govt of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna-800015. 2. Mr. Kumar Ravi, the District Magistrate, Patna. 3. The Patna Municipal Corporation through its Commissioner having Office at Maurya Lok Patna. 4. Himanshu Sharma, The Commissioner, Patna Municipal Corporation through its Commissioner Having Office at Maurya Lok Patna. 5. Sri Chhote Bihari Sao, Son of Late Nathuni Sao, Resident of Mohalla-New Paharpur, near Aerodrome Wireless Station-Punpun, District-Patna. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Awadhesh Prasad Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Yogendra Prasad Sinha (AAG 7) For the PMC : Mr. Sanjay Prasad Verma, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 3 12-03-2026 Heard the parties. 2. The present matter has been preferred for : “initiation of contempt proceeding against the Opposite Parties for their will full and deliberate violation of the order dated 22.04.2026 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 17240 of 2015 by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ravi Ranjan.” 3. Show-cause of Opposite Party No. 2 is on record Patna High Court MJC No.1935 of 2021(3) dt.12-03-2026 2/2 and learned State counsel has taken this Court to the order dated 06.05.2023 issued by the Circle Officer, Patna Sadar in Encroachment Case No. 37 of 2022-23 to show that it is a private land and as such, do not come under the Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956. 4. This Court is convinced that order stands complied. In that background, MJC No. 1935 of 2021 is disposed of. atul/- (Rajiv Roy, J) U T