Shiv Pujan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12472 of 2015 ====================================================== Sikandar Kumar son of Shiv Kumar Singh Resident of village-Dhandarh, P.S. - Sasaram, District - Rohtas.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary, Forest Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram.
3. The Divisional Forest Officer-cum-Authorised Officer, Rohtas Sasaram Forest Division, Sasaram, District - Rohtas.
.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13610 of 2015 ====================================================== Shiv Pujan Yadav Son of Late Harihar Yadav, Resident of Village - Tiura Khurd, Police Station - Chutiya, District - Rohtas. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Department of Forest and Environment, Bihar, Patna
2. The District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram.
3. The Divisional Forest Officer- cum - Authorised Officer, Rohtas, Forest Division, Rohtas at Sasaram.
4. The Forest Officer, Sasaram, Rohtas.
.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance:
(In CWJC No.12472 of 2015) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajani Kant Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Satya Prakash, A.C. to SC-22 (In CWJC No.13610 of 2015) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. N.K. Singh, SC-2 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 19-08-2016 In each of the two cases confiscation proceedings were initiated against the respective petitioners and since they
Patna High Court CWJC No.12472 of 2015 (5) dt.19-08-2016 were not disposed of that the petitioners approached this Court for provisional release of their respective vehicles during the pendency of the two writ petitions.
It is stated at the bar by learned counsel appearing for the respondents that final orders have been passed in the respective confiscation cases which are subject matter of these two writ petitions.
In that view of the matter, the two writ petitions are disposed of leaving it open for the petitioners to take recourse to the appellate remedy so available to them in law, if so advised. (Jyoti Saran, J) S.Sb/- U