Patna High CourtCWJC/8735/2016dismissed

Santosh Kuamr v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-10-03Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8735 of 2016 =========================================================== Santosh Kumar son of Late Kedar Nath Prasad, resident of Village, P.S. and P.O. Bikram, District- Patna .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Registration, Excise and Prohibition Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

2. The Inspector General of Registration, Government of Bihar, Patna

3. The Collector-cum-District Registrar, Patna

4. The Sub Registrar, Bikram, District- Patna

5. The District Sub Registrar, Patna .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bhola Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Rakesh Kr. Shrivastava, AC to GP 15 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 03-10-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and State.

2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the State submitted that the issue has been decided today by this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 6708 of 2016 in the case of Bihar Dastavej Navis Sangh and Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar and Ors., which has been dismissed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the present case is different in the sense that though the issue is the same but no show cause notice has been given to the petitioner in terms of Rule 13 (2) of the Bihar Deed Writers Licensing Rules, 1996.

4. In view of the fact that in C.W.J.C. No. 6708 of 2016,

Patna High Court CWJC No.8735 of 2016 dt.03-10-2017 2 / 2 the Court has recorded the statement on oath by the State that show cause notice had been given to everyone in every district of the State and the Court has also considered that on 28.03.2016, the Inspector General of Registration had specifically directed the persons concerned not to go on strike on 30.06.2016 and the same having been admitted by the Association, to which the petitioner also belongs, the Court has no reason to take a different view in the present writ petition and accordingly, the same stands dismissed in terms of reasons recorded in C.W.J.C. No. 6708 of 2016. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) Anjani/- AFR/NAFR U