Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 7948 (PAT)

Lal Pari Singh v. The District Collector, Hajipur

CWJC/2114/2025 · 2025-02-13

Nawneet Kumar Pandey

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.2114 of 2025 ====================================================== Lal Pari Singh W/o of Late Ajab Narayan Singh Resident of Village- Gazipur, Post- Ufroul, P.S.- Deshri, Jandaha Road, District- Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The District Collector, Hajipur Vaishali. 2. The Additional District Collector, Hajipur, Vaishali. 3. The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Mahua, Vaishali. 4. The Circle Officer, Deshri Circle, Hajipur, Vaishali. 5. Suraj Kumar, S/o- Vinod Mahto R/o- Village- Gazipur, Post- Ufroul, P.S.- Deshri, Jandaha Road, District- Vaishali. 6. Kajal Kumari, W/o- Suraj Kumar R/o- Village- Gazipur, Post- Ufroul, P.S.- Deshri, Jandaha Road, District- Vaishali. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shrinath Manjhi, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. A.A.G.-9 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 2 13-02-2025 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the State. 2. The present petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- (i) For issuance of necessary direction upon respondent authorities to take consideration of the representation given by the petitioner to the concerned respondents and for verifying if any interference has been done with the land records of the petitioner as stated in representation, then to take necessary actions in the interest of justice. (ii) For issuance of necessary direction/order upon respondent authorities to take Patna High Court CWJC No.2114 of 2025(2) dt.13-02-2025 2/2 corrective measures if any interference has been done with the land records of the petitioner or wrongfully entering the name of respondent No. 5 or 6 in register No. II in place of the petitioner. (iii) For issuance of necessary direction/order upon respondent authorities to take consideration of the petitioner's representation expeditiously as the petitioner's right over the property is being infringed. (iv) For any other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The petitioner may take the recourse of Right to Information Act for getting the information whether the Register No. II existing in the name of her father-in-law was cancelled by the Circle Officer or not. 4. With these observation(s), the petition stands disposed of. Neha/- (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) U