Patna High Court
Kesho Prasad vs The State Of Bihar on 15 September, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3611 of 2023
======================================================
Kesho Prasad Son of Late Sukar Prasad, Village-Koldiha, P.O. and Police
Station-Sirdala, District-Nawada.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue of
Land Reforms, Government of Bihar.
2. The District Magistrate cum Collector, Nawada.
3. The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Nawada.
4. The Subdivisional Officer, Rajouli.
5. The Circle Officer, Sirdala, Nawad.
6. Block Development Officer, Sirdala, Nawada.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Awadhesh Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Md. Khurshid Alam ( AAG 12 )
: Mr. Nutan Sahay, AC to AAG12.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 15-09-2023
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned counsel for the State.
2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the present
writ petition has been filed seeking direction to the respondents
to restrain from construction of Primary Agricultural Credit
Society (PACS) godown and rice mill of the raiyati land of the
petitioner. Counsel submits that the land in question is situated
in Mauja- Koldiha, Circle- Sirdala, bearing Revenue Thana No.
82, Khata No.- 160 Area- 13 acre 64 decimal.
3. Counsel submits that the petitioner was enjoying
the land in question without any reference and rent receipts is in
his favour, but recently he got information that Government is
Patna High Court CWJC No.3611 of 2023 dt.15-09-2023
going to construct rice mill and Primary Agricultural Credit
Society (PACS) godown on his land. Counsel further submits
that petitioner has neither given consent nor the respondent
authorities have acquired the said land and forcefully
constructed the Government's building on the said land.
Thereafter, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.
4. Counsel for the respondents has filed the counter-
affidavit in this case, but prior to entering into the counter-
affidavit, he submits that by making false representation before
this Court, the petitioner has obtained order of status quo in this
case vide order dated 08.05.2023.
5. Counsel for the State submits that one Rajendra
Prasad Yadav, son of Kesho Prasad Yadav and Raghao Prasad
Yadav, son of Chamari Prasad Yadav, Brahamdev Prasad Yadav,
son of Hiranian Prasad Yadav had executed two free and
voluntarily gift deeds in respect of Khata No. 34 (CS) - 160
(RS), Plot No. 746 (CS)- 815 (RS), Area 8 decimal and 14.5
decimal ( i.e., total Area 22.5 decimal) in the year 1981 in
favour of the State of Bihar.
6. Counsel for the State submits that in the content of
the said gift deeds, it has been mentioned that gift was made for
Patna High Court CWJC No.3611 of 2023 dt.15-09-2023
the purpose of construction and establishment of Referral
Hospital, Public School, Vegetable and Fruit Garden, Poultry
and Fishery Carpentry, Tannery and other necessary departments
and buildings. The copy of gift deeds is attached as Annexure- A
and A/1 of the counter-affidavit.
7. Counsel for the State further submits that the
petitioner has no right and title to raise any claim on the said gift
deed which was executed in the year 1981 itself. Counsel also
submits that learned counsel for the petitioner of the present writ
petition has filed a public interest litigation before this Hon'ble
Court in C.W.J.C. No. 3649 of 2023 with relief that villagers,
namely, Ragho Prasad Yadav and Brahamdeo Prasad Yadav and
others have donated the land in favour of the Governor of Bihar
for medical purposes only and his said writ petition was
dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 18.04.2023.
8. Counsel for the State further submits that the
petitioner is either one way or the other creating barrier in
developing work which are being done by the State and submits
that the petitioner has no local standi to raise such claim and his
representation should be dismissed.
9. In response, counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is the coparcener of the donees and this donation
Patna High Court CWJC No.3611 of 2023 dt.15-09-2023
cannot be said to be valid as partition has not taken place and
his share is also there in the donated property.
10. From the pleadings and the arguments, it
transpires to this Court that the petitioner is unnecessary
creating hurdle in the construction work on the land which had
already been gifted to the State of Bihar in the year 1981 and the
petitioner using the same lawyer is creating hurdle sometimes
by way of filing P.I.L. and sometimes in the individual capacity.
The argument made by the counsel for the petitioner is not
acceptable to this Court due to the reason that no such pleading
has been made in the writ petition about common share in
property, but upon raising those points by the counsel for the
State and counsel for the petitioner has come with new plea of
joint property.
11. In view of this Court, the present writ application
is frivolous and, therefore, stands dismissed.
12. The order dated 08.05.2023 is hereby vacated.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
prakashmani/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 21.09.2023
Transmission Date NA
