M/S Jai Hanuman Mini Rice And Floor Mill v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3001 of 2023 ====================================================== M/s Jai Hanuman Mini Rice and Floor Mill Proprietor Ashok Prasad Sah (Male) aged about 47 years Son of Ramvilash Sah, Present Resident of Village- Mohalla- Vishwamitra Colony, Niranjanpur, Sarimpur, Buxar, P.S. Industrial Area, Buxar, District- Buxar, Permanent Address- Resident of Village and Post Office- Lahna Chakki, Police Station- Brahampur, DistrictBuxar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Industry Department, Patna.

2.

The Managing Director, Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority (BIADA), Udyog Bhawan, East Gandhi Maidan, Patna. 3.

The Deputy General Manager Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority (BIADA), Patna Cluster, Patna.

4.

The Executive Director, Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority (BIADA), Patna.

5.

The Senior Account Officer, Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority (BIADA), Patna.

6.

The Area Incharge, Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority (BIADA), Industrial Area, Buxar, District- Buxar.

7.

The Assistant Regional Manager, Bihar Industrial Area Development Authority (BIADA), Industrial Area, Buxar, District- Buxar. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Kumari Priyanka, Advocate Mr. Nil Kamal, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Yogendra Prasad Sinha, AAG-7 Mr. Rakesh Ambastha, AC to AAG-7 For BIADA :

Mr. Girijish Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ORAL ORDER 21-04-2023 Learned counsel appearing for the respondent BIADA states that the authorities have not taken any action against the petitioner. Only the petitioner has been asked to start the production.

Patna High Court CWJC No.3001 of 2023(2) dt.21-04-2023 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is satisfied if the said statement is recorded at bar and he does not press the present writ petition at this stage. Having taken on record the aforesaid statement of learned counsel appearing for BIADA, this writ petition is dismissed as not pressed, as no cause of action arises as on date. (Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J) Amrendra/- Item No. 14 U