Nishant Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1464 of 2017 ======================================================

1. Nishant Kumar, Son of Sanjay Kumar Sharma, Resident of Village and P.O.- Dighra, P.S. Pusa, Distt.- Samastipur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Director, Panchayati Raj Department, Bihar, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur.

3. The District Development Commissioner-Cum-Chief Executive Officer, Jila Parishad, Muzaffarpur.

4. The District Engineer, Jila Parishad, Muzaffarpur.

5. The Circle Officer, Mushahari, District- Muzaffarpur. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mahasweta Chatterjee Mr. Mr. Ram Nibash Prasad Mrs. Sharmistha Chattarjee Mr. Samir Kumar Sinha For the Respondent/s : Mr. K.P. Gupta- Gp10 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 09-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State.

No one appears on behalf of respondent nos. 3 and 4,though the notices have validly been served upon them. The petitioner has come before this Court seeking issuance of direction to the respondent no. 3 to take necessary steps for settling Narayanpur Anant Parking situated in Shahpur Road District Muzaffarpur through open bid.

The petitioner compelled to file this writ petition

Patna High Court CWJC No.1464 of 2017 (3) dt.09-08-2017 2/3 because bid notice in the financial year 2015-16 was published on 15.02.2016 for settlement of Jalkar, Hat and Sairat for the financial year 2016-17 but subsequently, the District Engineer, Zila Parishad, Muzaffarpur issued notice for cancellation of the date of settlement of Narayanpur Anant Parking and fixed a new date as 16.03.2016 but again the aforesaid date was cancelled by issuance of another notice.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as a matter of fact, bid notice was earlier published for settlement of Narayanpur Anant Parking and when petitioner and some others made attempt to participate in the aforesaid bid, the settlement proceeding of the aforesaid Narayanpur Anant Parking was adjourned several times so that the settlement of Narayanpur Anant Parking could be made with henchman of the respondent no. 4 and that is the reason petitioner has come before this Court. Admittedly, settlement bid notice had been issued to financial year 1916-17 which has already lapsed and, therefore, in my view, this petition has already become infructuous. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of being infructuous. However, petitioner may raise his grievance before respondent no. 3 by filing representation petition and, if petitioner does so, the respondent no. 3, shall pass appropriate order on the

Patna High Court CWJC No.1464 of 2017 (3) dt.09-08-2017 3/3 petition of the petitioner in accordance with law within a month from the date of filing of the aforesaid representation. (Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J) N.K/- U