Ashok Kumar Patel v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5058 of 2014 ===========================================================

1. Ashok Kumar Patel Son Of Late Nathuni Prasad Resident Of Village - Ram Nagar ( Purani Bazar ), Police Station - Ram Nagar, District - West Champaran .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar

2. The District Magistrate, West Champaran, Bettiha

3. The Sub - Divisional Officer, Bagaha District - West Champaran

4. The Deputy Collector, Land Reforms, Bagaha, West Champaran, Bettiah

5. The Deputy Collector (Establishment) West Champaran, Bettiah

6. The Circle Officer Majhaulia, District - West Champaran, Bettiah .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr Pramod Kumar Singh Mr. Ramakant Yadav For the Respondent/s : Mr. GP-18 Vivek Prasad =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 02-03-2016 Only if the District Magistrate and the Circle Officer, Majuhaulia had cared to respond to the High Court for filing a counter affidavit, the occasion for personal appearance would not have arisen. In addition to that, now affidavits have been filed showing that the grievance of the petitioner now stands redressed and to that extent, the writ application has become infructuous.

All this position could have been made known to the Court earlier. If this could be achieved after filing of the writ application, the same could have been done even by the District Magistrate as well as the Circle Officer as a matter of routine as well. The Court fails to appreciate as to why a citizen has to be harassed

Patna High Court CWJC No.5058 of 2014 dt.02-03-2016 2/2 and compelled to come to the High Court even for routine kind of matters. This is apparent even from reading of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the District Magistrate and the Circle Officer that there was no major legal issue required to be decided or adjudicated by the Court, nor any interpretation of law was required, to extend the benefit or relief to the petitioner. Such a position is unacceptable to the Court because it causes undue harassment to a citizen for no apparent reason.

The personal presence of the District Magistrate and the Circle Officer stands dispensed with but they are cautioned to be more careful in future in matters of such kind coming before the court of law.

Writ stands disposed of.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) sk U