Hridyanand Sahay v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5847 of 2014 ====================================================== Hridyanand Sahay, son of late Ramadhar Lal, resident of Ram Jiut Niwas, Mohalla Mohanur, Punaichak (West of Devi Asthan) P.O. Punaichak, P.S. Shastrinagar, District-Patna .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Infrastructure Department, Old Secretariat, Patna

2. The Urban Commissioner, Patna Municipal Corporation, Maurya Lok, Patna

3. The Vigilance Officer, Patna Municipal Corporation, Maurya Lok, Patna

4. The Executive Officer, Nutan Rajdhani Anchal Office, Patna Municipal Corporation, Patna

5. Surendra Prasad Srivastava, son of Ram Brichh Lal, resident of Plot No. 305, Shashi Nandan Kanan Apartment, Ram Lakhan Singh High School Road, Punaichak, P.S. Shastrinagar, District Patna .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Verma, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. P.N. Sahi, AAG-10 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 11-05-2015 The grievance raised by the petitioner is that the complaint made by him before the Commissioner, Patna Municipal Corporation has not been disposed of.

Although it is submitted by Mr. Sanjay Prakash Verma, learned counsel for the Corporation that the matter was enquired into and the complaint was not found to be correct but Mr. Ravi Shankar Sahay, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that neither any such information has been received by the petitioner nor any counter affidavit has been filed by the Corporation bringing any such finding on record.

Patna High Court CWJC No.5847 of 2014 (2) dt.11-05-2015 2 / 2 Be that as it may, the complaint present at Annexure-2 is not descriptive of the alleged violations made by the private respondent nor it is in the form of a statutory application. In the circumstances noted above, the writ petition is disposed of affording liberty to the petitioner to file a duly constituted application setting out his grievance and it goes without saying that any such application filed by the petitioner would be considered and disposed of by the Municipal Commissioner in accordance with law and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the alleged violator expeditiously and preferably within 9 months of filing of such application.

Bibhash/- (Jyoti Saran, J) U