Md. Saifur Rahman v. The Chairman, Begusarai Jila Parishad

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12282 of 2019 ====================================================== Md. Saifur Rahman Son of Late S.M. Obashi, Resident of Village - lakhminiya, P.S.- Baliya, District- Begusarai. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Chairman, Begusarai Jila Parishad Begusarai. 2.

The District Magistrate, Begusarai.

3.

The Executive Officer Jila Parisad, Begusarai. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Akash Raj, AC to GA -5 For the Zila Parishad :

Mr. Nikesh Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 08-08-2023 Ref:- Interlocutory Application No. 1/2020 The aforesaid interlocutory application has been preferred for impleading her as party-respondent. The facts narrated is/are that the Shop No. 18 was allotted to one Md. Hasnul Arfin in the year 1998 and as he was selected for the post of Assistant Teacher, he put in his staff (the petitioner herein) to look after it who tried to assert the same, she being the wife has tried her best and as such, she may be heard.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, the Interlocutory Application No. 1/2023 stands allowed and the Intervenor-petitioner be impleaded as party-respondent.

Patna High Court CWJC No.12282 of 2019(2) dt.08-08-2023 2/2 C.W.J.C. No. 12282 of 2019 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner.

The newly added respondent no. 4 is present.

As per it, as stated above, the original allottee is the husband of the respondent no. 4 and suppressing this fact, the present writ petition.

Due to the threatening attitude of the petitioner, the respondent no. 4 has also lodged a case vide Balia P.S. No. 78/2021 on 19.03.2021 under Sections 341, 323, 504 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

From the facts stated above, it is clear that there has been suppression of fact on behalf of the petitioner. In any case, it is for the respondent no. 3, the Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Begusarai who has to take a decision.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. (Rajiv Roy, J) Jagdish/- U