Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 35065 (PAT)

Sri Ram Swarath Yadav v. The State Of Bihar and Ors

CWJC/21645/2014 · 2026-01-19

Rajiv Roy

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21645 of 2014 ====================================================== Sri Ram Swarath Yadav S/o Late Subalal Yadav Resident of Village Hasanpur Sagma @ Chaita, Tola Bastri, P.O. Chaita, P.S. Angarghat, Anchal Ujiarpur, District Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. The Commissioner, Darbhanga Division, Darbhanga. 3. The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Samastipur. 4. The Addl. Collector, Samastipur. 5. The Land Reforms Deputy Collector, Dalsingsarai, District Samastipur. 6. Sri Dhanuki Rai S/o Late Phulan Rai Resident of Village Hasanpur Sagama @ Chaita, Tola Bastri, P.O. Chaita Tole, Bastri, P.O. Chaita, P.S. Angarghat, Anchal Ujiarpur, District Samastipur. 7. Sri Phochchand Rai S/o Late Rijhan Rai Resident of Village Hasanpur Sagama @ Chaita, P.O. Chaita, P.S. Angarghat, District Samastipur. 8. Bindeshwar Rai S/o Rijhan Rai Resident of Village Hasanpur Sagama @ Chaita, P.O. Chaita, P.S. Angarghat, District Samastipur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. GP-25- Manikant Mishra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 3 19-01-2026 Heard the parties. 2. The present petition has been preferred for the following relief(s): “for issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the order dtd. 03.04.2013 passed in Land Ceiling Case No. 53/2008-09 by the Commissioner, Darbhanga Division, whereby the Commissioner, Darbhanga Division has allowed the appeal and Patna High Court CWJC No.21645 of 2014(3) dt.19-01-2026 2/2 set-aside the order dated 14.09.2009 passed by the Addl. Collector in Case No. 75/2007-08 and/or pass such other order/orders as your Lordship may think fit and proper.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that with the change of law relating to pre-emption matter, the case has become infructuous. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of as infructuous. 5. The amount, if deposited, has to be returned. Adnan/- (Rajiv Roy, J) U