Patna High CourtCWJC/7608/2011dismissed

Kapildeo Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2015-07-21Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7608 of 2011 ====================================================== Kapildeo Singh Late Shivlal Singh Village Dumduma, P.O. Bahrauli, P.S. Mashrak, Dist. Saran.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar Through The Secretary Mining, New Secretariat, Patna

2. The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Saran at Chapra

3. The Certificate Officer cum Deputy Director Mines Circle, Muzaffarpur

4. The Assistant Mining Officer, Saran at Chapra

5. The Certificate Officer, Saran at Chapra .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Mines : Mr. D.K.Sinha, Sr. Counsel (Mines) Mr. Rajendra Prasad (SPLPP) Mines For the State Mr. Ashok Kumar Choudhary-AAG-13 Mrs. Meera Singh AC to AAG 13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 21-07-2015 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner.

The counsel for the Respondent (Mines) is present. A counter affidavit on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 5 has been filed. No rejoinder thereto has been filed by the petitioner. The writ petition has been filed to quash the order dated 31.01.2011 which was passed in Certificate Case No. 97/8485/457/04-05. The grievance of the petitioner is that without considering the objection the order was passed.

Counsel for the State submits that the objection of the

Patna High Court CWJC No.7608 of 2011 (6) dt.21-07-2015 2/2 petitioner was considered which was found frivolous.

Accordingly, the order was passed. In fact, the petitioner was found running brick kiln without obtaining a valid quarry permit as required under Rule 27 of the Bihar Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1972.

Non appearance of the counsel for the petitioner, prima facie, indicates that the petitioner has lost interest in pursuing the present writ petition. Even otherwise, this Court in view of the facts disclosed in the counter affidavit and submissions made in support thereof does not find any merit in the writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed.

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) HR/- U