Harishankar Prasad Gupta v. The Bihar State Agriculture Marketing Board (Superseded),

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9876 of 2021 ====================================================== Harishankar Prasad Gupta Son of Bishundev Prasad resident of Bahadurpur, Ward no. 27, P.o.- Samastipur, P.s.- Town, District- Samstipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Bihar State Agriculture Marketing Board (Superseded), Patna 2.

The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Samastipur 3.

The Sub Divisional Officer cum Special Officer and House Controller, Samastipur 4.

The Assistant District Supply Officer cum Officer in Charge of Agriculture Produce Marketing Committee (Superseded), Mathurapur, Samastipur ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Lalit Kishore ( AG ) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) (The proceedings of the Court are being conducted by Hon'ble the Chief Justice/Hon'ble Judges through Video Conferencing from their residential offices/residences. Also the Advocates and the Staffs joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing from their residences/offices.) 19-01-2022 Petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s): "(i) For quashing the order dated 15.07.2020 passed by Sub-Divisional Officer-cumSpecial Officer and House Controller, Samastipur in House Controll Case No.07/2020 whereby and whereunder, he in haste manner enhanced the rent of the shop of the petitioner from Rupees 4204/- to Rs.4834.60/- at the rate of 15 % appertaining to shop no.SG-55, having size-1051 Square feet along with allottee of other shops/platform/open space located in the premises of APMC Madhurapur without affording reasonable opportunity to him to

Patna High Court CWJC No.9876 of 2021(3) dt.19-01-2022 2/2 raise objections against the enhanced rent which is unjust improper and contrary to the provisions of BBC Act.

(ii) For any other relief/reliefs as your lordships may deem fit and proper, in the back ground of existing facts and circumstances of the case."

On 03.01.2022, none had appeared on behalf of the petitioner. Even today, despite repeated calls and pass over, none appears on behalf of the petitioner. However, learned counsel for the respondents is present.

The petition is dismissed for default.

Interlocutory application, if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(Sanjay Karol, CJ) ( S. Kumar, J) K.C.Jha/DKS/- U