Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 16451 (PAT)

Lal Bahadur Sah v. The State Of Bihar and Ors

CWJC/17578/2017 · 2025-06-23

Rajiv Roy

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17578 of 2017 ====================================================== Lal Bahadur Sah Son of Late Mangal Sah Resident of Village-Sirisiya, P.S.- Kuchaikot, District-Gopalganj. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The District Magistrate, Gopalganj. 3. The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Gopalganj. 4. Bihar Bhoodan Yagya Committee Office, Gopalganj 5. District Bhoodan Yagya Committee Office, Gopalganj 6. The Circle Officer, Ciecle Kuchaikote, Gopalganj 7. Sharda Sah Son of Late Sukhlal Sah 8. Byash Sah Son of Late Sukhlal Sah Both are Resident of Village-Bazar Sirisiya, P.S.-Kuchaikote, District-Gopalganj ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anirudh Kumar Verma, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Md.Khurshid Alam, AAG-12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 2 23-06-2025 Heard the parties. 2. The present petition has been preferred for the grant of following relief(s): “for setting aside order dated 05.07.2017 passed in Misc. case no. 9 of 2016-17 by the Learned court of Land Reform, Deputy Collector, Gopalganj under the Land Dispute Resolution Act, whereby and whereunder the prayer for declaring the land in question under the right, title and possession of the petitioner as well as Patna High Court CWJC No.17578 of 2017(2) dt.23-06-2025 2/2 restraining the private Respondent from unlawful possession.” 3. After some argument, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he will be appealing before the appropriate authority but the delay has occurred as he under mistaken belief filed the writ petition. 4. If the petitioner prefers appeal in the next four weeks, the concerned authority shall take into consideration the limitation petition in view of the fact that the writ petition was pending before this Court since 2017. 5. The writ petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observation. vinayak/- (Rajiv Roy, J) U