Bijendra Prasad Gupta v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15136 of 2017 ====================================================== Bijendra Prasad Gupta son of Late Shivnandan Gupta, Village- Bhagipur, P.S.- Alamnagar, District- Madhepura.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through Collector, District-Madhepura. 2.

The Sub - Divisional Officer, Madhepura.

3.

The Anchaladhikari, Anchal- Alamnagar, District- Madhepura. 4.

The Anchal Amin, Anchal- Alamnagar, District- Madhepura. 5.

Shivan Mahto, son of Tulsi Mahto, 6.

Arun Mahto, 7.

Nirbodhi Mahto, 8.

Ajit Mahto, 10.

Sanjeet Mahto, all sons of Shivan Mahto, All resident of Village- Bhagipur, P.S.- Alamnagar, District- Madhepura.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Nafisuzzoha, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Md. Khurshid Alam - AAG12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 21-04-2023 The present petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs :- "(i) To issue appropriate writ / order / direction in the nature of Mandamus for commanding the respondent Anchaladhkari, Anchal- Alamnagar, District- Madhepura, to remove the encroachment of public way (aam rasta) illegally encroached by the respondents no. 5 to 9 by making their houses on P.W.D. road.

Patna High Court CWJC No.15136 of 2017(2) dt.21-04-2023 2/2 ii) To issue appropriate writ/order/ directions in the nature of Mandamus, for commanding the respondent authorities to settle the matter as early as possible, in view that there is always quarrel between the petitioner and respondents no.5 to 9 due to negligence of the respondent authorities and criminal conspiracy going on against the petitioner and his family."

At the outset, the learned counsel for the respondent State has referred to the counter affidavit filed in the present case to submit that the encroachment in question has stood removed.

In view of the aforesaid, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if that be the position, the petitioner is not having any subsisting grievances.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed off. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) rinkee/- U