Sagir Ali v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7799 of 2015 ====================================================== Sagir Ali. Son of Late Bashi. Resident of Village - Kendih, P.S.- Khana, District - Jamui, presently resident of Ward No. 18, Jamui town, P.O.+ P.S. and District - Jamui.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The District Magistrate, Jamui.

3. The In-charge Officer, Public Grievance Cell, Jamui Collectriate, P.S. and District - Jamui.

4. The Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Jamui.

5. The Block Development, Jamui, P.S. and District - Jamui.

6. The District certificate Officer, Jamui.

7. Sri Ratan Lal. Son of name not known to the petitioner, presently posted as Block Development Officer Azamnagar Block, P.S.- Azamnagar, District - Katihar.

8. Sri Tripurari Thakur. Son of name not known to the petitioner, Revenue Collector, Nagar Parishad, Jamui, P.S. & District - Jamui.

9. Smt. Nuraisha Khatoon. Wife of Md. Azim. Ex-ward Commissioner of Ward No. 18, Jamui Town, P.S. and District - Jamui. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Ram Chandra Singh, Advocate Mr. Kulanand Jha, Advocate For the Respondent State: Mr. P.K. Verma, AAG-5 Mr. Saroj Kumar Sharma, AC to AAG-5 For the Respondent No.4 :

Dr. Amitesh Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) 13-01-2016 Heard Mr. Ram Chandra Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. P. K. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General No.5, appearing for the State respondents. Heard also Dr. Amitesh Kumar, learned Counsel, appearing for the respondent No. 4.

Patna High Court CWJC No.7799 of 2015 (2) dt.13-01-2016 2/2 After some arguments, Mr. Ram Chandra Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner, seeks permission to withdraw this application, made, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in the nature of Public Interest Litigation, with liberty to approach the appropriate authority with appropriate application, if so advised, and/or to take recourse to such provisions of law as may be permissible.

No objection has been raised by the respondents to the prayer for withdrawal made by the petitioner. In view of the above and in the interest of justice, this writ application is hereby disposed of as withdrawn with liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority with appropriate application, if so advised, and/or to take recourse to such provisions of law as may be permissible. However, we make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merit of the present writ petition. (I.A. Ansari, ACJ) (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Pawan/- U