Shikila Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.625 of 2020 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4548 of 2017 ====================================================== Shikila Kumari Daughter of Shivji Prasad, Wife of Braj Bhushan Singh Resident of Village and P.O.- Naharpur, P.S.- Jandaha, District- Vaishali. at Hajipur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

Amrit Lal Meena, the Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

Udita Singh the District Magistrate, Vaishali 4.

Vijay Prakash Meena, the Deputy Development Commissioner and President, District Water and Sanitarion Committee, Vaishali. 5.

Sanjay Kumar Singh the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Vaishali. 6.

Manoj Singh the Executive Engineer-Cum-Member Secretary, District Water and Sanitation Committee, Vaishali.

7.

Rakesh Kumar, the Block Development Officer, Jandaha, District Vaishali. 8.

Ahiliya Devi the Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Bhorha @ Rasulpur Gaus, Block Jandaha, District Vaishali.

9.

Sri Arvind Kumar Chaudhary, the Secretay, Rural Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ashok Kumar Gupta, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Kameshwar Prasad Gupta (Gp 10) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 05-01-2024

1. The defects, pointed out by the Registry, are ignored.

2. At the outset, the learned counsel for the opposite parties has submitted by referring to the show-cause, filed in the present case that the Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna has already passed a reasoned order

Patna High Court MJC No.625 of 2020(3) dt.05-01-2024 2/2 dated 26.06.2020, hence the present petition has been rendered infructuous.

3. In view of the aforesaid, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in case of any subsisting grievance, the petitioner be granted liberty to take recourse to the due process of law for redressal of her subsisting grievances. Liberty so sought is granted.

4. The present contempt petition stands disposed off as not pressed.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Saurav/- U