Bhrigu Nath Sharan Pandey v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

Patna High Court CWJC No.4974 of 2015 (2) dt.15-03-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4974 of 2015 ======================================================

1. Bhrigu Nath Sharan Pandey Son of Late Raghuvir Sharan Pandey R/oVillage-Pokhara, P/s- Maharajganj, Circle- Maharajganj, District- Siwan. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the D.M. Siwan.

2. The Circle Officer, Maharajganj, Siwan.

3. The Judge I/C, Civil Court, Siwan.

4. Ananddeo Pandey, son of Late Raghunath Pandey.

5. Adarsh Kumar Pandey, son of Late Hriday Kumar Pandey

6. Anmola Kumari, Daughter of Raghunath Pandey.

7. Sunila Kumari Daughter of Raghunath Pandey.

8. Manoj Pandey

9. Dinbandhu Pandey, both sons of Late Binay Kr. Pandey, 4 to 9 are R/OVillage- Pokhara, P.S.- Maharajganj, Circle- Maharajganj, District- Siwan

10. Manan Prasad

11. Madan Prasad

12. Mohan Prasad

13. Suresh Prasad 10 to 11 sons of Late Chandrika Nonia, & son of Sathuni Nonia, 10 to 13 Resident of Village- Ratanpura, P.S.- Maharajganj, DistrictSiwan.

14. Ramesh Yadav son of Biran Yadav R/O- Village- Pokhara, P.S.- Maharajganj, Circle - Maharajganj, District- Siwan. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Alok Kumar Alok For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sc22-Kundan Bahadur Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MUNGESHWAR SAHOO ORAL ORDER 15-03-2016 Heard Md. N. Hoda, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

2.

This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India but at the time of hearing of the this writ application, learned counsel submitted that the writ application may be heard treating the same as an application under Article 227

Patna High Court CWJC No.4974 of 2015 (2) dt.15-03-2016 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, I heard him and also heard the learned counsel appearing for the State-respondents. 3.

In this writ application, prayer has been made by the petitioner for issuance of a direction to the learned Munsif No.2, Siwan to dispose of the Execution Case No. 02 of 1996/000105/2014 within the certain stipulated period as the case has been pending since long.

4.

In view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhey Shyam Vs. Chabbinath reported in 2015

(5) SCC 423, this writ application under 227 of the Constitution of India for the relief claimed is not maintainable. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed. However, the petitioner may pursue his remedy before the court below and pray for expeditious disposal.

(Mungeshwar Sahoo, J) brajesh/- U