Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 28277 (PAT)

Shiv Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar through the Additional Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms

MJC/668/2026 · 2026-07-31

Rajiv Roy

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.668 of 2026 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12989 of 2025 ====================================================== Shiv Kumar Singh Son of Ramnagina Singh, Resident of Village- Tetua, Police Station- Atri, District- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Additional Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms Government of Bihar, Secretariat, Patna, Sri Dipak Kumar Singh. 2. The Additional Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms, Government of Bihar, Secretariat, Patna, Sri Dipak Kumar Singh. 3. The Divisional Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya, Bihar, Sri A.N. Sakeda. 4. The District Magistrate-cum-District Collector, Gaya, Bihar, Sri Prashant Shubhankar. 5. The Additional Collector, Gaya, Bihar, Sri Ashutosh Kumar. 6. The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Nemchak Bathani, Gaya, Sri Keshav Anand. 7. The Circle Officer, Atri Block, District- Gaya, Bihar, Sri Dilip Kumar. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gajendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Government Advocate 7 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 3 31-07-2026 Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defect. 2. Heard the parties. 3. The present petition has been preferred: “for initiation of contempt proceeding against the contemnors/opposite parties for willful and deliberate violation of the order Patna High Court MJC No.668 of 2026(3) dt.31-07-2026 2/2 dated 18.08.2025 passed in CWJC No. 12989 of 2025 by the Hon’ble Court.” 4. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be permitted to withdraw the petition. 5. Accordingly, the MJC No.668 of 2026 is dismissed as withdrawn. vinayak/- (Rajiv Roy, J) U