Subhas Pandey v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19585 of 2014 ======================================================

1. Subhas Pandey son of Late Kailash Pandey resident of Tintanga Karari, P.S. - Gopalpur, District - Bhagalpur.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

2. The Principal Secretary, Road Division, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna.

3. The Commissioner, Bhagalpur Division, Bhagalpur.

4. The District Magistrate, Bhagalpur.

5. The L.R.D.C. Naugachia, District - Bhagalpur.

6. The Block Development Officer, Gopalpur, District - Bhagalpur.

7. The Circle Officer, Gopalpur, District - Bhagalpur.

8. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Tintanga Karari, P.S. - Gopalpur, District - Bhagalpur.

9. Hari Mandal son of Late Bale Mandal.

10. Basudeo Mandal son of Late Lale Mandal

11. Changuri Mandal

12. Pramod Mandal Both sons of Ganesh Mandal

13. Munner Mandal

14. Sone Lal Mandal Both sons of Late Bale Mandal

15. Shyamdeo Mandal (Amin) son of Anirudh Mandal All residents of Village - Tintanga Karari, District - Bhagalpur. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent Nos.1-7: Mr. Apurva Kumar, A.C. to GA-11 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) 09-12-2015 Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Apurva Kumar, learned Assistant Counsel to Government Advocate No.11, appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 7.

Patna High Court CWJC No.19585 of 2014 (2) dt.09-12-2015 2/2 After some arguments, Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner, seeks permission to withdraw this application, made, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in the nature of Public Interest Litigation, with liberty to approach the appropriate authority with appropriate application, if so advised, and also to take recourse to such provisions of law as may be permissible.

No objection has been raised the respondents to the prayer for withdrawal made by the petitioner. In view of the above and in the interest of justice, this writ application is hereby disposed of as withdrawn with liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority with appropriate application, if so advised, and also to take recourse to such provisions of law as may be permissible. However, we make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merit of the present writ petition. (I.A. Ansari, ACJ) (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Pawan/- U