Manoj Kumar Ojha vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Ors. on 25 March, 2011

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                 MJC No.526 of 2011
          MANOJ KUMAR OJHA son of Shri Devta Ojha resident of village-
          Aamhi Banke, P.O.- Soharnaria, P.S.- Kateya, District- Gopalganj.
                                                              ... Petitioner.
                                         Versus
     1.   THE STATE OF BIHAR through the Secretary Department of Land
          Reforms and Land Revenue, Government of Bihar, Patna.
     2.   Shri C. Ashok Vardhan, son of not known, the Principle Secretary,
          Department of Land Reforms and Land Revenue, Government of Bihar,
          Patna.
     3.   Shri Bala Murugan D. Son of not known, the District Magistrate,
          Gopalganj.
     4.   Shri Upendra Nath Pandey son of not known the then Deputy Collector
          Land Reforms, Hathua, P.S.- Hathua, District- Gopalganj.
     5.   Shri Shailesh Kumar Das son of not known the present Deputy Collector,
          land Reforms, Hathua, P.S.- Hathua, District- Gopalganj.
     6.   Shri Md. Alam the then Circle Officer, kateya, District- Gopalganj.
     7.   Shri Kanhaiya lal Son of not known the present Circle Officer, Katya,
          District- Gopalganj.
     8.   Shri kameshwar Prasad son of not known the Mahamantri, Bihar Bhoodan
          Yagya Committee Office, Arar More, District- Gopalganj.
     9.   Shri Shubh Murti son of not known the Chairman, Bihar Bhoodan Yagya
          Committee, Saristabad, Patna.
                                                                  ....Opposite parties.
                                        -----------

3. 25.03.2011 Having regard to the nature of the order passed

by this Court and the cause shown in the show-cause

filed today by opposite party no. 7, we are satisfied that

the order of this Court stands complied.

The grievance of the petitioner as with regard to

certain land being given by Bhoodan Yagya Committee,

being not a part of the direction of the earlier order,

liberty is given to the petitioner to approach appropriate

forum for redressal of such grievance.
With the aforementioned observation, this

application is disposed of.

(T. Meena Kumari, J.)

(Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)
Kanchan