← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/6925/2026disposed

Ramesh Ray v. The State Of Bihar

2026-06-25Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6925 of 2026 ====================================================== Ramesh Ray Son of Dineshwar Ray, resident of Village-Itva Devati, Police Station- Saran, District- Saran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Through Additional Chief Secretary, Dept of Mines and Geology, Govt. of Bihar, Bihar.

2.

The Additional Chief Secretary, Dept of Mines and Geology, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Director, Department of Mines and Geology, Govt. of Bihar, Patna, Bihar.

4.

The District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari. 5.

The District Mining Officer, East Champaran, Motihari. 6.

The Assistant Director, Department of Mines and Geology, East Champaran, Motihari.

7.

The Mining Inspector, East Champaran, Motihari. 8.

That Station House Officer, Motihari (West Champaran). ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhananjay Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Government Advocate (05) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 25-06-2026 Heard Mr. Dhananjay Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. The present petition has been preferred for the following relief(s):

"(i) For issuance of order/s, directions or including appropriate or writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondent authorities to release the truck bearing No. RJ27GB/1056 which

Patna High Court CWJC No.6925 of 2026(2) dt.25-06-2026 2/2 has been seized for illegal mining and overloading pursuant to the letter No. 01/M dated 22.04.2022 issued by under Signature of Mineral Development Officer, District Mines Office, East Champaran. (ii) For any other relief/s by which the petitioner found entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case."

3. After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it would suffice that if the District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari takes up the matter and disposes it of, after hearing the parties, in accordance with law.

4. The respondents have no objection to it.

5. In that background, the writ petition stands disposed of directing the petitioner to move before the respondent no. 4, District Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari in four weeks who shall be looking into the matter and disposing it of in accordance with law, at an earliest, preferably within a period of four months.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Adnan/- U