Anirudh Prasad Sahi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10686 of 2016 =========================================================== Anirudh Prasad Sahi son of Late Ram Naresh Prasad Shahi Resident of village, P.O. and P.S. Baruraj , District- Muzaffarpur .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

2. The Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

3. The Engineer-in-Chief-Cum-Additional Secretary-Cum-Special Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

4. The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur

5. The Executive Engineer, Road Construction Department, Road Division No.1, Muzaffarpur

6. The Assistant Engineer, Road Construction Department , Road Sub-Division, Deoria, Muzaffarpur

7. The Circle Officer, Motipur, District Muzaffarpur .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. S.B.K. Manglam, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Maruth Nath Roy, AC to SC4 Mr. Arvind Ujjwal =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 04-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has filed I.A. No.1772 of 2017 whereby he has challenged the rejection letter dated 10.01.2017, whereby the application for NOC was rejected. It is further submitted that as there is a decision of the Road Construction Department vide letter no.4770, dated 24.08.2017 wherein it has been decided that the dimension of the land, which was decided by the petrolling company for establishing the retail outlet on and before 13.12.2015, will be treated to be a valid size of the land for

Patna High Court CWJC No.10686 of 2016 dt.04-09-2017 2 /2 the purposes of establishment of the retail outlet. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that his case is covered by this letter and his size of the land is in terms of the advertisement published by the oil company.

3. In view of the policy decision dated 24.08.2017, let the Department should examine the case of the petitioner and take a decision in accordance with law. This Court is not passing any order on merit or quashing the order of rejection. If the petitioner files a fresh application or fresh representation within a period of three weeks from today, the authority will consider his application-cumrepresentation and take a decision within three weeks thereafter.

4. The writ petition stands disposed of.

(Shivaji Pandey, J.) S.Kumar/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 05.09.2017 Transmission Date 05.09.2017