Jagdish Prasad And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14962 of 2017 ====================================================== 1.

Jagdish Prasad Son of Late Basidev Prasad, ward No. 8, Sonapatti, Janki than Chakmahila, P.S. District- Sitamarhi.

2.

Gaya Prasad, Son of Raghunandan Prasad Ward no. 15, Sitamarhi, P.S. Distt.- Sitamarhi.

3.

Suresh Thakur, Son of Late Baleshwar Thakur, Main Road Sitamarhi, P.S. Distt.- Sitamarhi.

4.

Rahul Kumar, Son of Late Bindeshwar Prasad, Main Road Sitamarhi, P.S. Distt.- Sitamarhi.

5.

Santosh Kumar, Son of Late Lakshaman Prasad, Main Road Sitamarhi, P.S. Distt.- Sitamarhi.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The District Magistrate, Sitamarhi.

3.

The Deputy Collector-in-charge Khas Mahal, Sitamarhi. 4.

The Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Sitamarhi. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Devendra Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Md. Khurshid Alam - Aag12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 29-04-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The present petition has been preferred for the following relief/s:

(i) for issuance of writ in nature of mandamus and directing and considering commanding the respondent authorities for considering the notices dated

Patna High Court CWJC No.14962 of 2017(2) dt.29-04-2025 2/3 21.04.1986,23.11.1985,22.03.2000,16.08.

2016, 25.11.1994 respectively passed by respondent no.3 directed to petitioners to pay rent according to khash Mahal committee under the chairmanships of the Collector, Sitamarhi who has fixed by aforesaid mentioned as arrears of rent and Municipal Tax whereby and whereunder there were shops are built and admittedly the Khas Mahal land and subsequently the petitioners were inducted as tenant near the premises of Goenka College, Sitamarhi. Petitioners are ready to deposit the arrears of rent and Municipal Tax etc. because it is only source of earning of their family and any other relief/reliefs for which the petitioner is found to be entitled in the eye of law.

3. After some argument, learned counsel for the petitioners submit that he may be permitted to withdraw the petition to move before the competent Court for the redressal of the grievances.

Patna High Court CWJC No.14962 of 2017(2) dt.29-04-2025 3/3

4. Granting said liberty and without commenting on the merit of the case, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U