Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 35809 (PAT)

Purnea Berojagar Jagriti Bahudeshiya Swablambi Sahkari Samiti Ltd. and Anr v. The State Of Bihar and Ors

CWJC/4477/2015 · 2026-02-03

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.4477 of 2015 ====================================================== 1. Purnea Berojagar Jagriti Bahudeshiya Swablambi Sahkari Samiti Ltd. and Anr S/o- Madan Sah. R/o village P.O.- Chapahari, P.S.- Rupauli, District - Purnea. 2. Mithlesh Sah. S/o - Madan Sah. R/o village P.O.- Chapahari, P.S.- Rupauli, District - Purnea. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. The Collector, Purnea. 3. The Sub Divisional Officer, Banmanmkhi, District - Purnea. 4. The Assistant, Registrar Swablambi Sahkari Samiti, Purnea-Anchal, Purnea. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Raghwanand, GA-11 Mr. Sanjay Kr. Tiwari, AC to GA-11 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 3 03-02-2026 Heard the parties. 2. The present petition has been preferred for the following relief(s): “for quashing the settlement notice dated 10.03.2015 issued vide memo no. 1172 dated 10.03.2015, contained in Annexure-1, by Respondent No.3, by which he has notified for settlement of Sairat relating to Rajasvya Hat and Bus Stand mentioned in Annexure-1 for 2015-16 which is against provision of law. The law provides Patna High Court CWJC No.4477 of 2015(3) dt.03-02-2026 2/2 that the settlement of impugned sairat should be made with the Co-operative Society on the reserve Jama and not through auction, but in the instant case the claim of the society has been ignored, such action of the authority concerned is wholly illegal against the provision of law, and the said is fit to be quashed.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit 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. Ravi/- (Rajiv Roy, J) U