IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13131 of 2018 ======================================================

Basudeo Prasad Kashera and Ors.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar and Ors.

... ... Respondent/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Birendra Prasad Singh, AC to SC-19 ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

4 09-02-2026 Heard the parties.

2. The present petition has been preferred for the following relief(s):

“(i) for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 23-5-18 passed by Sri Ashok Vardhan, Member (Administrative). Bihar Land Tribunal, Patna in BLT Case No. 1388/2015 (as contained in Annexure-1) as well as order passed by Divisional Commissioner, Gaya in BLDR Appeal No. 113/11 (Annexure1/1) and where under the learned Member (Administrative) has affirmed the order dated 25-10-2012 passed by learned Court of Commissioner Magadh Division Gaya in B.L.D.R. Appeal No. 113/2011 saying as I do not find any need for interfering with the impugned order. The said Appeal has been filed against the order dated 4-8-2011 passed by D.C.L.R. Rajauli (Nawada) in B.L.D.R. case No. 007/2011 filed by Opposite party/ Respondent No.7, and the learned Commissioner has set aside order dated 4-8-11 passed by D.C.L.R. a result of which, by the order of Commissioner Direction to S.D.O. Rajauli to must take appropriate steps for restoring the northern wall of Respondent No. 7/appellant, house and facilitate possession of Respondent no. 7 over 10 Decimal of land as claimed is going to be effective and the respondent No. 7 is try to do the same as earliest rather the petitioners are entitled for 13 dec. and 1 dhur of land in question.

(ii) For issuance of any other writ/writs order /orders direction/directions your lordships may deem fit and proper in the fact and circumstances of this case.”

3. This application shall be heard.

4. Since respondent nos. 1 to 6 are State and respondent no. 7 is also represented, as such, no notice required.

5. Pleadings to be exchanged in six months.

6. Rule is made returnable within a period of one year.

(Rajiv Roy, J)

Adnan/-

U