Jagjivan Nayak v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.836 of 2020 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4048 of 2019 ====================================================== Jagjivan Nayak Son of Hussaini Ram Resident of Takia Bazar, PS- Sasaram, District- Rohtas at Sasaram.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna namely Anand Kishor Son of not known to the petitioner.

2.

Pankaj Dixit Son of not known to the petitioner the District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram.

3.

Raj Kumar Gupta Son of not known to the petitioner The Sub Divisional Officer, Rohtas at Sasaram.

4.

Nagar Parishad, Sasaram through Executive Officer, Sasaram namely Himani Kumari, Wife of not known to the petitioner. 5.

Himani Kumari Wife of not known to the petitioner Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Sasaram.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Rai, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Kinkar Kumar, SC-9 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 12-03-2026 Heard the parties.

2. The present petition has been preferred for the following relief(s):

"for issuance of a rule of contempt against contemnor opposite parties for their willful and deliberate disobedience shown to the order dated 01-03-2019 passed in CWJC No. 4048/19 by a bench of this Hon'ble Court presided over by

Patna High Court MJC No.836 of 2020(3) dt.12-03-2026 2/2 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sudhir Singh and flagrant violation of the same and punish them suitably for said contemptuous acts."

3. Learned counsel representing Sasaram Municipal Corporation has taken this Court to Annexure-H series to show that after the notices were issued to the parties, both the complainant as also the encroacher appeared and jointly submitted in proceeding case no. 07 of 2023-24 that they have compromised the matter and do not want to pursue the case further.

4. Taking note of the said averment made in the show cause as also the document on record, MJC No. 836 of 2020 stands disposed of.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Adnan/- U