Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.913 of 2015 =========================================================== Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal, son of Late Laxmi Prasad Gupta, resident of VillagePakridayal, P.S.- Pakridayal, District- East Champaran. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Collector, East Champaran, Motihari.

2. Chairman, Zila Parishad, East Champaran, Motihari.

3. Executive Officer -Cum- D.D.C. Zila Parishad, East Champaran, Motihari.

4. District Engineer, Zila Parishad, East Champaran, Motihari.

5. Sambhu Prasad, son of Late Raghunath Sah, resident of Village- Pakridayal, P.S.- Pakridayal, District- East Champaran.

6. Laxmi Prasad, son of Late Raghunath Sah, resident of Village- Pakridayal, P.S.- Pakridayal, District- East Champaran.

7. Ram Narain Sah, son of Late Mahadeo Sah, resident of Village- Pakridayal, P.S.- Pakridayal, District- East Champaran.

8. Ganesh Sah, son of Late Asharfi Sah, resident of Village- Pakridayal, P.S.- Pakridayal, District- East Champaran.

.... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Kumar Mishra For the Respondent/s : Mr. SC31-PANDEY S.SAHAY =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date: 04-05-2015 The writ petition was filed in the Public Interest Litigation with a prayer, that hardly conveys any meaning. The effort of the petitioner appears to be to ensure that no shops are constructed on the Chapra-Nepal Road. There is hardly any consistency in the prayer of the application. However, the petitioner filed I.A. No.836/15 confining his relief to the one of requesting the respondents to constitute a

Patna High Court CWJC No.913 of 2015 dt.04-05-2015 2/2 development committee in terms of the relevant provisions of the Constitution of India.

In the recent past, a representation was made on 16.5.2015 in relation to the construction of shops.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The prayer in the writ petition is in uncertain terms and there is hardly any consistency between one paragraph and the other. Further, the petition was filed originally in the ordinary course and thereafter converted into a Public Interest Litigation. Be that as it may, on 16.4.2015, a representation is said to have been made to the District Collector, East Champaran, pointing out certain grievances.

We dispose of the writ petition directing the District Collector, East Champaran, to take the representation into account and pass appropriate orders within three months.

(L. Narasimha Reddy,CJ) (Sudhir Singh, J) K.C.jha/- U