Bajarang Bahadur Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15140 of 2021 ====================================================== Bajarang Bahadur Singh Son of Sri Krishna Kant Singh Resident of MohallaShanti Nagar, Ward No. 11, Bhabua, P.S.- Bhabua, District- Kaimur at Bhabua.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Through the Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The District Magistrate Kaimur at Bhabua.

4.

The Executive Officer Nagar Parishad, Bhabua, District- Kaimur at Bhabua. 5.

Sri Jainendra Arya, Chief Councilor Nagar Parishad, Bhabua, DistrictKaimur at Bhabua. 6.

The State Election Commission Bihar, Patna through its Secretary. 7.

The Secretary of the State Election Commission Bihar, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar Mishra, Adv Mr. Nawal Kishor Singh, Adv For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Kinkar Kumar, SC-9 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH) 05-04-2022 The petitioner, in the present writ application, is seeking direction to the Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Bihar, to take appropriate action against Respondent No. 5, who is the Chief Councilor of Nagar Parishad Bhabua in the District of Kaimur at Bhabua, in exercise of power under Section 25(5) of the Bihar

Patna High Court CWJC No.15140 of 2021(3) dt.05-04-2022 2/2 Municipal Act, 2007 (for short 'Act').

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though the District Magistrate has submitted a report in relation to certain irregularities committed by the respondent no. 5 in his capacity as the Chief Councilor, no action has been initiated against him as contemplated under Section 25(5) of the Act. From the pleadings on record, we notice that the petitioner has not approached the competent authority who could take action under the provisions of the Act. In such view of the matter, we are not inclined to entertain the relief which the petitioner is seeking in the present writ application. This application, however, is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to approach appropriate authority raising his grievance.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) ( Madhuresh Prasad, J) SUMIT/- U