Patna High Court
Ramesh Kumar ShraffversusThe State Of Bihar and Ors
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The petition is infructuous and is disposed of.
Summary
Petitioner Ramesh Kumar Shraff filed a writ petition seeking a certiorari to quash an order of the District Land Acquisition Officer directing him to return Rs.20,39,654. The State argued that the matter had already been examined and, because the claim of respondent Bisun Das was not genuine, the refund process was dropped by an order dated 03.03.2015. The court noted that with the refund order already set aside, there was no operative relief left to grant. Consequently, the petition was held to be infructuous. The writ petition was therefore disposed of without any further order.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate remedy when an order directing refund of money has been dropped by the authority?
- Whether the writ petition seeking quashment of the refund order remains maintainable after the refund process was terminated.
Subjects
- writ of certiorari
- land acquisition
- refund order
- infructuous petition
- civil writ jurisdiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2946 of 2015
======================================================
Ramesh Kumar Shraff Son of Late Shighashan Prasad Shraff, Resident of
Mohalla - Patel Path, Raxaul, P.S. - Raxaul, District - East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar.
2. District Land Acquisition Officer, East Champaran at Motihari.
3. Bisun Das Son of Late Babu Ram Das Resident of Village - Chikni, P.O. and
P.S. - Raxaul, District - East Champaran.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ajay Behari Sinha, GA-8
Ms. Kalpana, AC to GA-8
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 20-01-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The present petition has been preferred for the
following relief(s):
“That the petitioner invokes in this writ
application in the nature of writ, order or direction,
particularly in the nature of writ of Certiorari for
quashing of Case No. 15/10-11 passed by District
Land Acquisition Officer, East Champaran,
Motihari whereby and whereunder the petitioner
was directed to return Rs. 20,39,654.00 (Twenty
lacs thirty nine thousand six hundred fifty four) by
cheque within fortnight (contained in Annexure: 1
Patna High Court CWJC No.2946 of 2015(3) dt.20-01-2026
2/2
to this petition).”
3. Learned counsel for the State, Mr. Ajay Behari
Sinha has taken this Court to the counter-affidavit file on behalf
of the respondent nos. 1 and 2 with reference to paragraph-6 to
show that the matter was enquired by the respondents and as the
claim of the Bisun Das (respondent no. 3) was not found
genuine, the process initiated for refund of amount through Case
no. 15 of 2010-11 stands dropped vide an order dated
03.03.2015.
4. In that background, nothing remains and the writ
petition stands disposed of as infructuous.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Adnan/-
U
Checking your session…