KANIK MAHTO Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have received a notice under the Bihar Tenancy Act, 1885. The notice offers an opportunity to the petitioners to show cause why a certain demand be not met by the petitioners. There is no lack of opportunity in the show cause notice in permitting the petitioners to object to the authority on the requirement of the notice. Instead of doing that the petitioners have filed writ petitions straight away. They do not even appear before the authority who has given the notice.

(2.) THE parameters on which a writ of certiorari may issue do not exist in the present writ petition for the Court to issue a writ upon it. There is no record in the present writ petition that the authority has passed an illegal order. The petitioners did not contend before the authority, though given an opportunity, and permitted ex -part proceedings.

(3.) IN the writ petition the petitioners acknowledge that the land in their occupation is Raiyati land and that the petitioners have constructed a shop over the plot in question. The petitioners contend that the agricultural land is waste land and is not fit for agricultural purposes and thus it was put to commercial use.