Smt. Kiran Devi @ Kiran Devi v. The State Of Bihar and Ors
CWJC/22846/2018 · 2025-05-15
Alok Kumar Sinha
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 49643 (PAT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 49643 (PAT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.22846 of 2018 ====================================================== Smt. Kiran Devi @ Kiran Devi Wife of Suresh Prasad Resident of Mohalla- Golbagicha Gabra P.S. Kotwali District-Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. The senior superintendent of police Gaya.
3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Sadar Gaya
4. The Circle Officer Sadar Gaya
5. The Municipal Commissioner, Gaya Municipal Corporation Gaya
6. The Officer incharge Delha police station Gaya
7. Mahadev Ram Son of Late-Jageshwar Ram Resident of Mohalla-surkhai mill bairagi Town Gaya P.S. Delha, District-Gaya
8. Mantra Devi Wife of Mahadev Ram Resident of Mohalla-surkhai mill bairagi Town Gaya P.S. Delha, District-Gaya ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vishwa Ranjan Choudhary, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sajid Salim Khan, SC-25 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 2 15-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the Corporation and learned counsel for the State.
2. From the perusal of the averments made in the writ application it transpires that the grievance of the petitioner is against private respondent nos. 7 and 8 who are alleged to have encroached the private land of the petitioner. There is no allegation against the Corporation or the State of having encroached the private land of the petitioner.
3. The learned counsel for the Respondent-State as
Patna High Court CWJC No.22846 of 2018(2) dt.15-05-2025 2/2 well as the Corporation submit that since this is a private dispute between two private parties, it can only be adjudicated before the Civil Court and not by way of writ application.
4. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is also of the view that the present writ application is not maintainable and hence it is dismissed granting liberty to the petitioner to pursue his remedy before the Civil Court.
Gaurav Sinha/- (Alok Kumar Sinha, J) U