Raja Edward v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6545 of 2025 ====================================================== Raja Edward S/o Late Edward George, R/o Village Ahirani Tola, Ward No. 30, PO and PS-Bagaha, District-West Champaran, presently resident of C101, Takshila Apartments, P.S.-New Delhi, Dist-New Delhi. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Department of Forests, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Principal Secretary, Land and Revenue Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Divisioanl Forest Officer, Valmiki Tiger Project Belbag, Bettiah, West Champaran.

4.

The District Forest Officer, West Champaran, Bettiah. 5.

The District Magistrate, West Champaran at Bettiah. 6.

The Superintendent of Police, West Champaran at Bettiah. 7.

The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Bagaha.

8.

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Bagaha.

9.

The SHO, Bagaha Police Station, District-West Champaran. 10.

Amit Edward, S/o Late Edward George, R/o Village Ahirani Tola, Ward No. 30, PO and PS-Bagaha, District-West Champaran. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Chandra Kant, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Government Pleader (22) Mr. Narendra Kr. Singh, AC to GP 22 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 18-11-2025 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.

2. This writ petition has been filed seeking the following relief(s):- A. To issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction to the Respondents to take immediate action to comply the order dt 22/1/2024 (annexure.3) and order

Patna High Court CWJC No.6545 of 2025(7) dt.18-11-2025 2/2 dt.8/5/2024 (annexure4) passed in 1/2024 under the provision of Bihar Saw Mill act 1990 and stop the illegal operation of the saw mill and to confiscate the same under section 13 (b) of the Act;

B. To issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction to the Respondents to take action under section 14 of the Act and impose penalty on the respondent no 10.

3. At the very outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in view of the counter affidavit, this writ petition has become infructuous.

4. In that view of the matter, this writ petition stands dismissed as infructuous.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Shishir/- U