High Court Patna High Court

Tildhari Roy vs State on 22 December, 2008

Patna High Court
Tildhari Roy vs State on 22 December, 2008
Author: Ajay Kumar Tripathi
                        CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.6899 OF 1990

                     TILDHARI ROY, son of late Ramshray Rai resident of village - Panapur
                     Langa, P.S. Hajipur Sadar, District - Vaishali.
                                                                              ---------------------- Petitioner
                                               Versus

                     1. The State of Bihar
                     2. Collector, Vaishali at Hajipur
                     3. Bhagwat Thakur son of Sri Hirdaya Thakur, resident of village Panapur Langa,
                        P.S. Hajipur Sadar, District - Vaishali.
                     4. Chandrika Singh, son of not known, resident of village Panapur Langa, P.S.
                        Hajipur Sadar, District - Vaishali.
                                                                      ---------------------- Respondents.

                     For The Petitioner :     Mr. Shrinandan Pd. Sinha, Advocate
                                              Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate.

                                            PRESENT

               THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI
                                 *************

A. K. Tripathi, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

In exercise of power under Section 32 of the

Consolidation Act, by virtue of the order dated 20.09.1990, the

Collector Vaishali at Hajipur had declared the Kewala dated

19.12.1977 to be invalid since it was in breach of Section 5 of

the Consolidation Act and further a fine of Rs. 200/- was also

imposed upon the petitioner. The order contained in Annexure –

1 is under challenge in the present writ application.

Submission of learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner is that the order impugned is erroneous inasmuch as

it is accepted position, which emerges from perusal of the order,

that there was publication of register of lands, but the

publication of statement of principle had not been done nor

confirmed to have taken place. In absence of the publication of
-2-

both, the alienation could not be said to have fallen foul of

Section 5 of the Act.

A Division Bench Decision rendered in the Case of

Ramjanam Singh Versus The State of Bihar reported in

2001 (4) PLJR 531 has been brought to my notice, as the law

on the issue.

The impugned order contained Annexure – 1 dated

20.09.1990 is quashed. The writ application is allowed.

Patna High Court
The 22nd Day of
December, 2008, (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)
NARF/AFR,
Rajeev/