NIRANJAN MISHRA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.Binodanand Mishra,learned counsel for the petitioner, learned G.P.-19 for the State and Mr. Rakesh Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No.7.

(2.) The petitioner has come before this Hon'ble Court for quashing the order dtd. 8/3/2022 passed by Gram Katchahry Rampatti Case No.01 of 2021 whereby on the application of the respondent No.7, the Gram Katchahry decided that the respondent No.7 will remain in possession of the land of the petitioner till the petitioner does not remove the building from the land of respondent No.7. The petitioner has also been imposed cost of Rs.8500.00 by way of compensation for demolishing the pillar and the DPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner further prays to quash the oroder dtd. 16/3/2024 passed in First Appeal Case No.01 of 2024 by the Gram Katchahry, Rampatti, whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order dtd. 8/3/2022 in Case No.01 of 2021 has been dismissed.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.7 had submitted an application on 20/9/2021 before the Sarpanch, Gram Katchahry, Rampati stating therein that the petitioner has taken back the land given in exchange. The respondent No.7 has prayed that he should be given the land earlier given to him and the cost of pillar and DPC amounting to Rs.25000.00. In response to the application of respondent No.7, the petitioner filed his reply stating therein that there was no exchange of land between the respondent No.7 and the petitioner and petitioner has also stated that he has not taken possession of any land of respondent No.7 and the petitioner has also raised the objection of maintainability of the application of respondent No.7 before the Gram Katchahry and petitioner has raised objection stating therein that the respondent No.7 has raised the issue of right, title and interest over an immovable property and in view of Sec. 111 of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act the Gram Katchahry has no power to decide right, title and interest over the land in question and in view of the provisions stipulated under Seciton 111 of Bihar Panchayat Raj Act the application of respondent No.7 was not maintainable. Despite of objection raised by the petitioner a Bench of Gram Katchahry, Rampatti led by Sarpanch and some other Panches without hearing the petitioner and without looking to the response filed by the petitioner and even without considering the preliminary objection of maintainability of the petition filed by respondent No.7 decided the matter in favour of respondent No.7 by order dtd. 8/3/2022 holding that the respondent No.7 not remain in possession of the land of the petitioner till the petitioner vacates the land of respondent No.7 from his house. The Gram Katchahry also directed that the petitioner is liable for compensation of Rs.8500.00 to respondent No.7.