Santosh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8183 of 2017 =========================================================== Santosh Kumar, S/o Rajeshwar Prasad, R/o Mohalla-Premganj, Ward No.-7, P.O. & P.S.-Laganj, District-Vaishali.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary, Nagar Vikash and Awas Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

4. The Commissioner, Tirhut Pramandal, Muzaffarpur,

5. The District Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satya Prakash Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Prabhat Kumar Verma-AAG-3 Ms. Divya Verma, AC to AAG-3 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date: 28-07-2017 Seeking a mandamus to the respondents to declare a particular area as Sub-Division in a particular District, this writ petition has been filed in public interest. The question as to under which District a Sub-Division is to be established, what are the demarcation or boundaries of the Sub-Division and various other issues involved therein as are canvassed in the writ petition are exclusively within the administrative domain of the State Government and based on policy, decisions are taken and, therefore, a mandamus cannot be issued for such a purpose. The question of demarcation of

Patna High Court CWJC No.8183 of 2017 dt.28-07-2017 2/2 revenue area, constitution of Sub-Division and its attachment for administrative purpose is exclusively within the administrative domain of the State Government based on policy decision taken. The petitioner, if advised, may take up the issue with the authorities of the State Government and it would be for the authorities of the State Government to consider public interest involved in the matter and proceed in accordance with law.

With the aforesaid observation and liberty to the petitioner finding no case made out for exercising our extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, we dismiss the writ petition.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) Sunil/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 31.07.2017 Transmission Date