Md. Mahfooj Alam And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15926 of 2016 ======================================================

1. Md. Mahfooj Alam, Son of Mahmood Alam

2. Shakir Ansari, Son of Late Farid Miya

3. Md. Taufik Raja, Son of Tahir Miya

4. Jiyauddin, Son of Safir Miya

5. Md. Azaz Ansari, Son of Late Jakir Miya

6. Md. Javed Akhtar, Son of Late Ramjan Miyan

7. Md. Maqbul, Son of Late Ilahi

8. Md. Yunus Ansari Son of Sakur Miyan.

All are resident of village - Ishlam Nagar, Panchayat Garhi, P.S. Khaira, Anchal Khaira, District - Jamui. .... .... Petitioners.

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through District Magistrate, Jamui.

2. The District Development Officer, Jamui.

3. The Sub - Divisional Officer, Jamui.

4. Circle officer, Khaira, District Jamui.

5. Kalim Miyan.

6. Salim Miyan Both sons of Chamari Miya.

Both are resident of village - Ishlam Nagar, Panchayat Garhi, P.S. Khaira, Anchal Khaira, District - Jamui. .... .... Respondents. ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners : Mr. Shivendra Kumar Sinha, Adv. Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sinha, Adv.

For the Respondents : Mr. Firoz Ahmad, AC to AAG-12. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE And HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 27-03-2017 The grievance of the petitioners, who are residents of village Ishlam Nagar under Panchayat Garhi in the district of Jamui, is that in the village, in question, a Karmsala Bhawan was constructed in the year 2002-03 with the fund allotted to the member of the district counsel Khaira. But, with the passage of time private-respondent nos.5 and 6 have taken over the possession of the Karmsala Bhawan and are utilizing it for the

Patna High Court CWJC No.15926 of 2016 (02) dt.27-03-2017 - 2 - personal purpose and private use instead of for the benefit of the local people.

On the aforesaid fact, for ventilating their grievance, the petitioners made representation to the respondent no.1, the District Magistrate, Jamui, but the District Magistrate, having not taken any action, this petition has been filed. Keeping in view the matter under consideration and without entering into the controversy and merits or making any observation on the allegations made by the petitioners, respondent no.1, the District Magistrate, Jamui is directed to look into the grievance of the petitioners and pass such order as may be permissible in law after hearing respondent nos.5 and 6. The District Magistrate, Jamui is expected to pass an order preferably within a period of six months from the date of filing of the complaint by the petitioners with a copy of this order. With the aforesaid, this petition stands disposed of. (Rajendra Menon, C.J.) (Sudhir Singh, J.) Trivedi/- U