Md. Moiz v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7887 of 2014 ====================================================== Md. Moiz son of Late Md. Mohiuddin resident of village - Bhokrahi, P.S. - Kishanpur, District - Supaul.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Divisional Commissioner, Koshi Division, Saharsa.

4. The District Magistrate, Supaul.

5. The District Education Officer, Supaul.

6. The Block Development Officer, Vishanpur, District - Supaul.

7. The Block Education Officer, Vishanpur, District - Supaul.

8. Md. Abul Kaish S/o Late Haji Mohammad Hanif

9. Jafir Alam S/o Late Haji Mohammad Hanif

10. Md. Obadullah S/o Late Md. Yahiya

11. Abdul Matin S/o Late Md. Yahiya

12. Sami Ahmad S/o Late Md. Yahiya

13. Md. Hidaytulla S/o Late Md. Yahiya All (8 to 13) resident of Mauza - Abhuar Tola - Bhokhrahi, P.S. - Kishanpur, District - Supaul. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Mishra For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ram Vinay Pd. Singh, AC to GA-12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 21-10-2016 After hearing both sides and the statements made in the application filed by the petitioner, Mr. Mishra is allowed to effect correction(s) in the description of the respondent nos. 6 and 7 and is also permitted to implead Bihar State Madarsa Board through the Secretary as party respondent no. 14. Heard.

The application was initially presented as Public Interest

Patna High Court CWJC No.7887 of 2014 (3) dt.21-10-2016 2/2 Litigation. The grievance of the petitioner is that the private respondents have got fake Madarsa registration in the name of Madarsa Kahkasha Darul Banat showing illegally the Gairmajarua Khas Anabad land as the land of the Madarsa. In this way, the respondent(s) are misappropriating the government fund/public money.

On the request of the petitioner, the subject matter of the writ petition was changed and that is how the case is before this Court. The application has been filed as a class of action. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, the Court is not inclined to invoke its extraordinary and discretionary writ jurisdiction.

Mr. Mishra states that the petitioner be granted liberty to ventilate his grievance before the Authority created under the newly enacted law called the "Public Grievance Redressal Forum Act 2016".

The writ application is disposed of with the said liberty. (Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) rohit/- U