Mahesh Kumar Ram v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2079 of 2019 ====================================================== Mahesh Kumar Ram, age about 28 years, son of Sri Baldev Ram, resident of Ward No. 1, Village- Tal Dasraha, P.O.- Singhiyakhurd, P.S. Samastipur (Mufsil), District- Samastipur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar at Patna.

3.

The Managing Director, CDRSM, Begusarai DO, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Begusarai-851114.

4.

The Engineer in Chief cum Additional Commissioner cum Special Secretary, Road Construction Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 5.

The Executive Engineer, Road Construction Dept., Road Division, Rosera, District Samastipur.

6.

The Collector, Samastipur.

7.

The Sub- Divisional Officer, Rosera.

8.

The Divisional Forest Officer, Samastipur.

9.

The Officer-in-Charge, General Administration Cell, Samastipur. Samastipur.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ghanshyam Choudhary, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Mahtab Alam, AC to SC 20.

For the I.O.C. : Mr. Ankit Katriar, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 22-04-2019 The petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the Executive Engineer, Road Division, Samastipur in for not considering the request of the petitioner for issuance of 'No Objection Certificate' (NOC) as required for setting of the retail outlet (Kisan Seva Kendra) on the proposed land. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from Annexure '5' Series to the writ application, it would appear that the petitioner has drawn the attention of the Executive Engineer,

Patna High Court CWJC No.2079 of 2019(2) dt.22-04-2019 2/2 Road Division, Samastipur towards pending request but that has not brought any result to the petitioner. It is further grievance of the petitioner that the respondent no.7 is also not issuing the necessary NOC.

Learned counsel for the State submits that in the nature of the grievance raised by the petitioner, an appropriate direction may be issued to the Respondent Nos.4 and 7 to take an appropriate decision thereon.

Respondent Nos. 4 and 7 are, accordingly, directed to look into the grievance of the petitioner, consider the same and pass an appropriate order thereon within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. If NOC is required to be issued, the authorities shall consider the same in accordance with law and shall issue the NOC if the petitioner is found entitled for the same but in no case it should be delayed for more than thirty days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

The application stands disposed of, accordingly. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) R.R.Ojha/- U