Sidheshwar Prasad Sinha and Others vs The State of Bihar and Others

Ajay Kr. Tripathi, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties. The relief which the seven petitioners are seeking cannot be granted by this Court in exercise of its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. There are many conflicting statements which has been made in the affidavits which have been filed by the respondents and sum essence of the dispute is with regard to the right, title and interest of the petitioners to remain on a piece of land as a settle under a so-called scheme of rehabilitation executed by the State of Bihar. But the right and title of the petitioners are based on certain documents which have been stated to be forged and fabricated by the respondents.

All these issues will require thorough investigation by a competent court of civil jurisdiction and the said exercise cannot be carried out or decided based merely on affidavits and that too conflicting in nature. This Court without expressing any opinion on the merit of the claim of the petitioners, disposes of this writ application with liberty to petitioners to move the court of competent jurisdiction for declaration of their right, title and interest, if they are so advised. The earlier order of status quo stands vacated by virtue of the disposal of the writ application.