✦ Patna High Court

Rajendra Singh v. The State Of Bihar

CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No. 11912 of 2008RAKESH KUMAR

Case at a glance

Bench
RAKESH KUMAR

Judgment

.... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Achhaibar Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. (Sc7) Mr. Abhay Kumar Singh No-1 Mr. Brajesh Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 3 18-04-2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. None appeared either on behalf of State or on behalf of respondent no. 4, who has already entered appearance through his counsel. The present writ petition pertains to an order passed under Section 35 of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956, by Joint Director of Patna High Court CWJC No.11912 of 2008 (3) dt.18-04-2013 Consolidation, Gaya. During the pendency of the present writ petition for adjudicating such dispute an appropriate forum as “Land Tribunal” has been constituted and functioning under the provision of Bihar Land Tribunal Act, 2009. Accordingly, the court is of the opinion that this matter can be referred to the Tribunal In view of provision contained in Section 15 of the Bihar Land Tribunal Act, 2009, the Registry is directed to transmit the record of this case to the Tribunal forthwith. Interim order of stay dated 14/5/2009 shall remain operative till any further order is passed by the Tribunal. (Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/-

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Patna High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No. 11912 of 2008). ← Search more judgments