IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21416 of 2011 1. Smt. Rani Pushpendra Kunwar @ Pushpendar Kunwar, Wife of Sri Kumar Arun Chandra Singh, resident of Fort Area, P.S.: Kotwali, District: Munger, at present residing at Willams Town, P.S. and District: Deoghar (Jharkhand). 2. Smt. Archana Devi @ Archana Kumari, Wife of Sri Krishna Murari, resident of Village: Kataria, P.S.: Muffasil, District: Munger, at present resident of Area, P.S.: Kotwali, District: Munger. . . . . . Petitioners. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. District Khas Mahal Officer, Munger. 3. District Magistrate, Munger. . . . . . Respondents. ---------------------------------- 2/ 14.12.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. In the instant writ application, the petitioner prays for quashing Memo no.502 dated 24.11.2011, issued by District Khas Mahal Officer, Munger to petitioner no.2, to explain as to why the lease land bearing Tauzi no.133, Jamabandi no.44, khata no.41, Khesara no.166 and 167, area 14 katha and 15 dhurs be not acquired and petitioner no.2 may not be ousted from the lease premises. The petitioner submits that the house stands on the aforesaid land, which was initially leased to one Nirmalendu Mukherjee and others and same was sold to Smt. Rama Devi through registered sale deed dated 08.12.1981, in which consideration money was paid. Thereafter Smt. Rama Devi came in possession as an owner of the property and executed a WILL on 22.06.1990 in favour of Smt. Pushpendar Kunwar (petitioner no.1), who happens to be the daughter-in-law of Smt. 2 Rama Devi. It is submitted that Smt. Rama Devi filed an application for renewal of lease dated 18.11.1991 before the Collector, Munger, which is still pending. He further submits that Smt. Rama Devi died on 01.06.1992 and after her death, petitioner no.2 claims to have become owner of the land and house existing on the said plot. It appears that petitioner no.1 executed power of attorney dated 16.12.2010 in favour of petitioner no.2 to look after the property for some time, as she has left Deoghar for some personal reasons. Learned counsel submits that petitioner no.1 is still owner of the premises in question. Counsel for the State submits that the lease deed was executed in favour Nirmalendu Mukherjee, which remained valid till 1991. She further submits that the lease could not have transferred to another person without permission of the Collector of the District. She further submits that in this case Nirmalendu Mukherjee transferred the land to one Rama Devi, who has virtually transferred the land to petitioner no.2, through power of attorney. It appears from Annexure-1, which is notice dated 24.11.2011 requiring petitioner no.2 to appear and filed her reply by 10.12.2011. Petitioner no.2 after receipt of notice has filed this writ application in this Court on 01.12.2011. In the circumstances, I extend the time period for 3 filing reply to the notice by further two weeks. Petitioner no.2 must file her reply to show-cause by 02.01.2012, if not already filed. The respondent no.2 would also hear petitioner no.1, if she appears and files a representation within the same time. Respondent no.2 thereafter would dispose of the matter in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within six weeks. Till disposal of the matter, status quo as of today would be maintained. This application stands disposed of. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)