Mridula Kumari Gupta @ Mridula Devi v. The State of Bihar through the Secretary
L.P.A/729/2023 · 2025-03-20
Partha Sarthy
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 44663 (PAT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 44663 (PAT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.729 of 2023 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.838 of 2023 ====================================================== Mridula Kumari Gupta @ Mridula Devi Wife of Ramanand Prasad Resident of Janki Asthan, Riga Road, Ward No.- 2, P.S. and District- Sitamarhi. ... ... Appellant/s Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Collector, Sitamarhi.
3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sitamarhi.
4. The Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Sitamarhi.
5. The City Manager, Nagar Nigam, Sitamarhi.
6. Nishant Kumar @ Nishant Singh, Son of Narendra Kumar Singh @ Kalicharan Resident of Janki Asthan, Riga Road, Ward No.- 2, P.S. and District- Sitamarhi. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Devendra Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Arun Kumar Bhagal, AC to AAG-12 For the Nagar Nigam : Mr. Subodh Kumar, Advocate ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 20-03-2025 Re.- I.A. No. 01 of 2025 :- The learned Advocate for the appellant presses I.A. No. 01 of 2025 for condoning the delay of 27 days in preferring this appeal.
2. For the reasons stated in the application, the
Patna High Court L.P.A No.729 of 2023 dt.20-03-2025 2/2 delay of 27 days in preferring this appeal is, hereby, condoned.
3. I.A. No. 01 of 2025 stands allowed.
Re.- LPA
No. 729 of 2023
:-
4. We are in absolute agreement with the order of the learned Single Judge asking the appellant to seek the available remedy to him for getting the encroachment removed from a particular place.
5. There is no reason why such an order need be interfered with.
6. There is no merit in this appeal and it is, accordingly, dismissed.
7. Interlocutory application/s, if any, also stands
disposed off accordingly.
Sauravkrsinha/ Praveen-II- (Ashutosh Kumar, ACJ) (Partha Sarthy, J) AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 22.03.2025 Transmission Date NA