Yogendra Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7816 of 2016 ====================================================== Yogendra Kumar Singh Son of Late Subh Dayal Singh Resident of Mohalla - Maranpur ( Devi Aasthan ), P.O. Chand chaura, P.S. Civil Lines, District - Gaya .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

2. The Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandary & Fishries Deptt., Govt. of Bihar, Patna

3. The District Magistrate, Gaya

4. The District Animal Husbandry officer, Gaya

5. The District Deputy Development Commissioner, Gaya

6. The Block Development officer, Gaya

7. The Circle officer, Gaya

8. The Corporation Bank through its Branch Manager, Gaya

9. The Branch Manager, Corporation Bank, Gaya .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance:

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Praveen, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rajiv Kumar Singh, GP-2 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 12-05-2016 Heard the parties.

The petitioner prays for an appropriate direction to the District Animal Husbandry Officer, respondent no.4, Gaya for release of the subsidy amount in favour of the petitioner through the process of the Corporation Bank, Gaya under the Samagra Gavya Vikas Yojana. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the letter of the In-Charge, District Animal Husbandry Development Officer, Gaya dated 11.2.2015 present at Annexure1 to submit that the petitioner is entitled to a subsidy amount of Rs. 6,77,000/-. It is the grievance of the petitioner that although he has obtained loan from the Corporation Bank but a part of the

Patna High Court CWJC No.7816 of 2016 (2) dt.12-05-2016 investment was under a subsidy to be released by the State Government in its Animal Husbandry Department and although the Bank has duly intimated the District Animal Husbandry Officer vide letter dated 08.6.2015 with a request to release the subsidy amount with a reminder on 24.11.2015 present at Annexure-6 but to no avail. With reference to the representations filed by the petitioner present at Annexure-7 and 8 he submits that even the representations of the petitioner have gone unnoticed and the subsidy evades the petitioner.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of grievance raised herein, I deem it fit and proper to dispose of the writ application with direction to the District Animal Husbandry Officer, Gaya to consider the grievance of the petitioner and dispose of the same within a maximum period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt / production of a copy of the order. Needless to add that in case the petitioner is found entitled to the release of subsidy amount in the light of Annexure-1, the same be also released within the same period. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of. (Jyoti Saran, J) S.Sb/- U