Virendra Prasad v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14348 of 2018 ====================================================== Virendra Prasad Son of Bhagvat Prasad, Resident of Village- Kakaila, P.S.- Nalanda, District- Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through Secretary Energy Department, Patna 2.
That Managing Director, Bihar State Power Holding Company and Power Grid, Patna.
3.
The Secretary Joint Venture of Bihar State Power Holding Company and Power Grid 2nd Floor Alankar P 4.
The Deputy Managing Director Commercial Power Grid East Bihar State Power Holding Company, Patna.
5.
The Executive Engineer, Bihar State Power Holding Company and Power Grid, Nalanda at Bihar Sharif.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sanjay Prasad, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr.Yogendra Prasad Sinha- AAG-7 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 06-01-2020 The petition filed on 23.07.2018 is listed for hearing for the first time today before the Court.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Patna High Court CWJC No.14348 of 2018(2) dt.06-01-2020 2/3 counsel for the respondents.
Petitioner has prayed for the following relief: " For issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any appropriate writ/order/direction commanding the respondents to restrain for fixing tower for passing 132 KVSC between Bihar Sharif and Shekhura near the village of Kakaila because more than 60 big trees will be cut and this rout is only 60 metre near from the village. For a further direction for changing rout of fixing tower through Bhunaiya Khandha of Begumpur where no tree is standing and about 1.50 kilometre distance shall also be reduced and pass such order or direction in the interest of poor villagers of Kakaila."
After the matter was heard for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner shall be content if a direction is issued to the concerned respondents to consider and decide the representation, which the petitioner shall be making afresh within a period of four weeks from today. Learned counsel for the State states that upon receipt of such request, if any, the same shall be dealt with in accordance with law, expeditiously and positively within a period of three months from the date of receipt thereof. Equally, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to take recourse to such alternative remedies as are otherwise available
Patna High Court CWJC No.14348 of 2018(2) dt.06-01-2020 3/3 in accordance with law.
We are hopeful that as and when petitioner takes recourse to such remedies, as are otherwise available in law, before the appropriate forum, the same shall be dealt with, in accordance with law and with reasonable dispatch. The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (Sanjay Karol, CJ) (Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) P.K.P./- U