Patna High CourtMJC/92/2015disposed

Samiur Rahman v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-04-03Mr. Justice Shivaji Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.92 of 2015 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8319 of 2013 ======================================================

1. Samiur Rahman S/o Late Sayeedur Rahman Presently residing at Rahika tola, Ward No. 21, P.L.A. School Gali, Near A.D.B. Chowk, Araria, P.S. & District - Araria .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Narendra Kumar Singh, District Magistrate Cum Collector, Araria

3. Amarendra Nath Tiwary, District Programme officer, Collectorate, Araria

4. Sanjay Kumar, Sub Divisional officer Cum Sub Divisional Magistrate Araria, P.S. and District Araria

5. Satyendra Kumar Singh, Circle officer, Araria

6. Rajiv Ranjan Sharma, Executive Engineer, Local Area Engineering Organisation Works Division Araria

7. Charu Chandra Mishra, Assistant Engineer, Local Area Engineering Organisation, Works Division, Araria

8. Sunil Kumar Singh, Junior Egineer Local Area Engineering Organisation, Works Division, Araria .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranvijay Narain Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. Madhuresh Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 03-04-2017 Heard the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that work order has been cancelled but certain work has been done and materials are lying in the private land of the petitioner as public road can not be constructed over his private land without permission of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the State submits that in view of cancellation of work order whatever advance has been given

Patna High Court MJC No.92 of 2015 (5) dt.03-04-2017 the same has been directed to be returned. No materials are lying in the private land of the petitioner.

In such view of the matter, the authority would see if anything is lying that should be removed within one month from today. If they would fail to remove the material the petitioner, if so advised, may use it for his personal use. Accordingly this application is disposed of.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) Vinay/- U