IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15712 of 2007 Om Prakash Prasad Son of Late Rajaram Prasad, resident of Village- Sathi, Mandir Tola, P.S. Sathi, District-West Champaran ----------- Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Collector, West Champaran, Bettiah 3. The Additional Collector, West Champaran, Bettiah 4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Narkatiaganj, West Champaran 5. The Anchaladhikari, Lauriya Anchal, District-West Champaran ---- ----- Respondents. ---------------- 2. 5.3.2009 Heard Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma for the petitioner, and learned Assistant Counsel to Standing Counsel No.23. This writ petition has been preferred with a prayer to quash the notice bearing letter no. 1851/Rev. dated 30.7.2007 (Annexure-1), issued under the signature of respondent no.2, whereby plot no.1767, covering an area of 22 decimals, appertaining to Khata No.12, has been directed to be settled for construction of a Primary School. The petitioner raises a grievance before this Court that he is in occupation of a portion of the plot and claims Basgit purcha. Section 3 of the Bihar Privileged Persons Homestead Tenancy Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act reads as follows: “3. Act not to apply to certain lands, buildings or area.- This Act shall not apply to- (a) any land or building, residential or otherwise.- (i) appertaining to an industrial establishment: (ii) vested in the Government or a local authority; and (b) any land situated within- (i) any area which has been, or may hereafter be, constituted a municipality or notified area under the provisions of the Bihar and Orissa Municipal Act, 1922 (B & O Act VII of 1922) or a Union Committee constituted under section 38 of the Bihar and Orissa Local Self- Government Act of 1885 (Bengal Act III of 2 1885); (ii)Vested in the Government except homestead deemed to have been acquired by the State Government under sub-section(2) of section 17A, or a local authority; (iii) any other area which is declared by the State Government by notification issued in this behalf to be a place of business or fair. (Provided that if any area in which a privileged person or a privileged tenant has acquired any right in his homestead under this Act, is subsequently converted into an area mentioned in Sub-clause 1) of clause (b), the privileged person or the privileged tenant, as the case may be, shall not be divested or deprived of his right in the homestead.).” It is evident that the land in question is a Government land and, therefore, the benefit of Basgit purcha is not available with respect to a Government land. The writ petition is, therefore, fit to be rejected. It is accordingly dismissed. Vinay/ ( S. K. Katriar ,J. )