Sumitra Devi And Anr vs State Of Bihar And Ors

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

Heard Mr. Ravi Kant Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Sajid Salim Khan, learned SC 25 along with Mr. Wasi Ahmad Khan,

learned AC to SC 25, for the State.

The petitioners have moved the Court for the following reliefs:

“(A) To issue the Writ of Mandamus Commanding the Respondents to Discharge there Legal Obligation to disposed the Application given

by petitioners on dated 21/08/2020 under Land Disputes Resolution Act 2009, as per laws and procedure.

(B) To issue the writ of certiorari and order to the Respondents for, Demolish the Boundary Wall illegally constructed over the land of the

petitioners situated under Mauza Dhanant (Mahuabagh), Chhpti Rukanpura, Anchal-Danapur, District- Patna bearing Thana No. 20,

Khata No. 119, Keshra No. 2567, Some of the Land Dispute for Issue the matter Related to the Passage (Rasta) and also constructed the

some land over the Land of the Petitioners by respondent No. 10 forcedly with the Help of police and Local Executive Magistrate in illegal

blatant Force and Means.

(C) To issue the writ of mandamus commanding the Respondents to discharge there legal obligation to conducted the proper Enquiry in the

matter and given the opportunity to the Petitioners accordance with law and Provision of laws.

(D) To Proper legal action against the such responsible Respondents which are involved in such illegal, Manner to harass the petitioners

with so many corners.

(E) To any other Relief/s, order/s, Direction/s to Petitioners may be found entitled to.â€​

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the common vendor of the petitioners and the private respondents had earmarked certain piece of

land for common passage, but the private respondents have blocked the same by keeping bricks and other materials due to which the petitioners are

unable to use it as a passage. It was submitted that they had moved the DCLR, Danapur, Patna (respondent no. 4) for clearance of the same but he

has disposed off the representation saying that he has no jurisdiction to entertain such application under the provisions of Section 9 of the Bihar Land

Dispute Resolution Act, 2009 (hereinafter after referred to as the ‘Act’).

Learned counsel for the State submitted that such dispute of getting any private area cleared is not within the jurisdiction of the authorities under the

Act as only there can be demarcation of the boundaries, that too, based on legally enforceable documents like registered sale deed etc. It was further

submitted that the authorities do not have the power to implement or execute any agreement between the parties for which only the Civil Court of

competent jurisdiction has jurisdiction.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submission of learned counsel for the parties, the Court finds substance in the stand

taken by learned counsel for the State.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed off with liberty to the petitioners to move before the appropriate forum, in accordance with law, with

regard to the reliefs claimed in the present writ application.

The Court would only observe that it has not expressed any opinion with regard to the merits of the case and if the petitioners move before such

forum, the case of the petitioners shall be considered on its own merits, in accordance with law, without being prejudiced by the present order.