IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.108 of 2009 ARBIND KUMAR S/O LATE RAMCHANDRA SINGH, R/O VILALGE- SABANHUA, P.S.- HARNAUT, DISTRICT- NALANDA Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH THE LAND REFORMS COMMISSIONER, GOVERNMENT OF BIAHR, PATNA 2. THE ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR, NALANDA AT BIHAR SHARIF 3. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, BIHAR SHARIF, DISTRICT- NALANDA 4. THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR, LAND REFORMS, BIHAR SHARIF, NALANDA. 5. THE CIRCLE OFFICER, HARNAUT BLOCK, DISTRICT- NALANDA ----------- For the Appellant :-Mr. Abhay Kumar Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Anil Kumar Upadhayay, Advocate For the Respondents :-Mr. Amitabh Bhardwaj, AC to SC-21 --------------------- 2 12/02/2009 Writ petitioner- appellant, aggrieved by the order dated 12.12.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 15228 of 2007, has preferred this appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. Short facts, giving rise to the present appeal are that the writ petitioner- appellant filed a writ application inter alia seeking direction for settlement of 9 decimal of land of plot no. 2540 under Khata No. 251 Touzi No. 2188, Thana No. 213 in village Sabanahua within Harnaut Block of the District Nalanda. Aforesaid claim has been made on an assertion that appellant is in occupation of the same for long time and in the part of the aforesaid plot dwelling house situates. A proceeding for removal of encroachment made by the petitioner has been initiated and accordingly, the learned Single Judge did not accede to the prayer of the writ petitioner and dismissed the writ application. - 2 - Mr. Abhay Kumar Singh, Sr. Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the matter of settlement of the land is pending before the authority and as such they may be directed to take final decision. State is represented by AC to SC-21. As the petitioner has no right of settlement of the land and further a proceeding for removal of the encroachment having been taken, we are not inclined to give the direction prayed for by the appellant. It is worth mentioning that the land which the petitioner prays to be settled is adjoining a hospital. We do not find any merit in the appeal. It is dismissed in limine. (Chandramauli Kr. Prasad, ACJ.) (Shyam Kishore Sharma, J.) avin