Mukesh Kumar Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9857 of 2026 ====================================================== Mukesh Kumar Pandey Son of Hari Shankar Pandey, At present resident of Plot No. E-38, 4th Floor, BLKE, MCD Park, Kirti Nagar, P.S.- West Delhi and Permanent resident of Village- Mathia, P.O- Shahpur, P.S.- Nautan, District- Siwan.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Chief Secretary Revenue Department, Govt. of Bihar, Old Secretariat Patna. 2.

The District Magistrate-cum-the 2nd Appellate Authority, Siwan. 3.

The Sub Divisional Public Grievance Redressal Authority, Siwan. 4.

The Addl. Collector-cum-the 1st Appellate Authority, Public Grievance Redressal Authority, Siwan.

5.

The Circle Officer, Nautan, Siwan.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Government Pleader (17) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RANA VIKRAM SINGH ORAL ORDER 07-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. At the very outset, Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner prays for withdrawal of the writ application in view of the specific statutory provision of revision as contained in Section 9 of the Bihar Right to Public Grievance Redressal Act, 2015, to which the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has no objection. Rather he submits that the petitioner could have approached the authority in terms of Section 9 prior to coming

Patna High Court CWJC No.9857 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026 2/3 to this Court.

3. In view of the fair stand taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ application is disposed of with liberty to approach the appropriate authority in terms of Section 9 of the aforesaid Act within three weeks henceforth and the authority being saddled with the responsibility to decide the revision in terms of Section 9 of the Act, will decide the same within a period of three weeks thereafter.

4. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays that he may be allowed to raise his prayer for an interim relief before the authority as mandated in Section 9 of the Act. In view of this prayer, the petitioner is given liberty to file an appropriate application seeking an interim relief. If the petitioner files any such application within a period of two weeks henceforth, the appropriate authority shall decide the same purely on the basis of its merit on priority basis, preferably within a period of one week from the date of filing and till such an application for interim relief is decided by the authority competent to decide under Section 9 of the Act, no coercive action shall be taken by the respondent.

5. It goes without saying that if any question of limitation arises before the competent authority, the same shall

Patna High Court CWJC No.9857 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026 3/3 be considered taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner was pursuing the issue before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

6. The writ application stands disposed of.

(Rana Vikram Singh, J) Rupa/SupratimU