← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/4030/2025disposed

Nagendra Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2025-04-08Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4030 of 2025 ====================================================== Nagendra Singh, Son of Daroga Singh, Resident of Village Ramouli, P.ORamouli, P.S- Patepur, District- Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Collector, Vaishali, District Vaishali at Hajipur. 2.

The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Vaishali, District Vaishali at Hajipur. 3.

District Development Officer, Vaishali at Hajipur. 4.

The Superintendent of Police, Vaishali, District Vaishali at Hajipur. 5.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Mahua, District- Vaishali at Hajipur. 6.

Circle Officer, Patepur, District- Vaishali at Hajipur. 7.

Block Development Officer, Patepur, District Vaishali at Hajipur. 8.

S.H.O., Patepur Police Station, District Vaishali at Hajipur. 9.

Asha Devi Wife of Ashok Rai, Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Simarwara, PO-Ramauli , PS- Patepur District- Vaishali.

10.

Nawal Ram Son of Ajodhi Ram, Resident of Village- Ramauli and P.O.- Ramauli, P.S.- Patepur, Block and Anchal- Patpur, District- Vaishali. 11.

Shatrudhan Ram Son of Late Mishri Ram, Resident of Village- Ramauli and P.O.- Ramauli, P.S.- Patepur, Block and Anchal- Patpur, District- Vaishali. 12.

Bablu Ram son of Harichanran Ram, Resident of Village- Ramauli and P.O.- Ramauli, P.S.- Patepur, Block and Anchal- Patpur, District- Vaishali. 13.

Anil Ram Son of Bateshwar Ram, Resident of Village- Ramauli and P.O.- Ramauli, P.S.- Patepur, Block and Anchal- Patpur, District- Vaishali. 14.

Surendra Ram Son of Bateshwar Ram, Resident of Village- Ramauli and P.O.- Ramauli, P.S.- Patepur, Block and Anchal- Patpur, District- Vaishali. 15.

Upendra Ram Son of Bateshwar Ram, Resident of Village- Ramauli and P.O.- Ramauli, P.S.- Patepur, Block and Anchal- Patpur, District- Vaishali. 16.

Sauhelal Ram Son of Doman Ram, Resident of Village- Ramauli and P.O.- Ramauli, P.S.- Patepur, Block and Anchal- Patpur, District- Vaishali. 17.

Pankaj Ram Son of Sauhelal Ram, Resident of Village- Ramauli and P.O.- Ramauli, P.S.- Patepur, Block and Anchal- Patpur, District- Vaishali. 18.

Sujeet Ram son of Nawal Ram, Resident of Village- Ramauli and P.O.- Ramauli, P.S.- Patepur, Block and Anchal- Patpur, District- Vaishali. 19.

Suraj Ram Son of Rajdev Ram, Resident of Village- Ramauli and P.O.- Ramauli, P.S.- Patepur, Block and Anchal- Patpur, District- Vaishali. 20.

Nitesh Ram Son of Yogendra Ram, Resident of Village- Ramauli and P.O.- Ramauli, P.S.- Patepur, Block and Anchal- Patpur, District- Vaishali. 21.

Ram Pravesh Ram son of Late Shukul Ram, Resident of Village- Ramauli and P.O.- Ramauli, P.S.- Patepur, Block and Anchal- Patpur, DistrictVaishali.

2/4 22.

Bhola Ram Son of Pryag Ram, Resident of Village- Ramauli and P.O.- Ramauli, P.S.- Patepur, Block and Anchal- Patpur, District- Vaishali. 23.

Jitendta Ram son of Late Arun Ram, Resident of Village- Ramauli and P.O.- Ramauli, P.S.- Patepur, Block and Anchal- Patpur, District- Vaishali. 24.

Sanjeev Ram Son of Jaglal Ram, Resident of Village- Ramauli and P.O.- Ramauli, P.S.- Patepur, Block and Anchal- Patpur, District- Vaishali. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajeev Ranjan- Advocate Ms. Bela Singh- Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Ajay Bihari Sinha-Government Advocate (8) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 08-04-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AC to GA-8 for the State.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, seeks permission to delete the name of the respondent nos.10 to 24 during course of the day.

3. Permission to accorded.

4. It is next submitted that land pertaining to Khata No.198, Khesra No.68, area 51 decimal at village- Ramauli along with the land pertaining to Thana No.458, Khata No.149, Khesra No.69, area 43 decimal at village- Ramauli is khatiyani land of the petitioner over which the authorities are forcefully constructing a road under MANREGA Scheme.

5. It is next submitted that petitioner objected the construction of the road on his private land, but then, no heed was paid by the authorities as the Mukhiya of the village is

3/4 interested in getting the road constructed under MANREGA Scheme over the land of the petitioner, as such, the petitioner represented before the District Magistrate, Vaishali vide his representation dated 21.10.2024 sent by speed post as would manifest from Annexure- P/4 series. It is further submitted that till date, no action has been taken on the representation sent by the petitioner to the Collector, Vaishaili through speed post, on which the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that it might be a possibility that the representation of the petitioner dated 21.10.2024 sent through speed post may not have reached the office of the Collector, on which the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner will file a fresh representation detailing the facts as recorded in the instant writ application for seeking redressal of his grievance before the Collector, Vaishali on or before 21.04.2025.

6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the writ application is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Collector, Vaishali detailing the facts based on which the petitioner was seeking relief in the instant writ application on or before 21.04.2025.

7. It is made clear that if any application is filed by

4/4 the petitioner before the Collector, Vaishali on or before 21.04.2025, in that event, the Collector will consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner within a period of two months thereafter after giving proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

8. It is made clear that no coercive shall be taken against the petitioner until the representation of the petitioner is decided by the Collector.

9. It is further made clear that if no application is filed on behalf of the petitioner before the Collector on or before 21.04.2025, in that event, the protection granted to the petitioner shall automatically come to an end.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U