Kayanat Welfare Association, Through Its Secretary v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No. 2000 of 2016 Arising out of Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 683 of 2015 ====================================================== Kayanat Welfare Association, through its Secretary, Nripendra Kumar, having its registered office at Saraswati Lane, East Lohanipur, P.S. Kadamkuan, District/Town-Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

Sri Amrit Lal Mina, the Principal Secretary Urban Development Department, Bihar, Patna.

3.

Sri Vinay Kumar, the Bihar Rajya Pool Nirman Nigam, through its Chairman Bihar Rajya Pool Nirman Nigam, Patna. 4.

Sri Shirsat Kapil Ashok, Patna Muncipal Corporation through its Commissioner, Patna Municipal Corporation, Maurya Lok Complex, P.S. Kotwali, District/Town- Patna.

5.

Sri Khagesh Chandra Vishwas, the Chief Engineer, Patna Municipal Corporation, Maurya Lok Complex, P.S. Kotwali, District/Town- Patna. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.

For the State :

Mr. Raghwanand, GA 11 Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwari, AC to GA 11 For the PMC :

Mr. Sanjay Prakash Verma, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 23-07-2019 Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner. Learned AC to GA 11 for the State and Mr. Sanjay Prakash Verma, learned counsel for the Patna Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation') have assisted the Court.

2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the Corporation drew the attention of the Court to order dated 19.08.2016 passed by the Municipal Commissioner of the

Patna High Court MJC No.2000 of 2016 dt.23-07-2019 2/2 Corporation in compliance of the order of the Court dated 14.07.2015 in CWJC No. 683 of 2015. He submitted that the claim of the petitioner has been rejected. Learned counsel submitted that copy of the show cause has been served on learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. In the aforesaid background, taking into note the fact that nobody has appeared on behalf of the petitioner, as also that there is no rejoinder to the show cause filed on behalf of the Corporation, the Court finds that there is no contempt by the authorities.

4. Accordingly, the application stands disposed off. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar AFR/NAFR U T