Ram Kishore Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

Patna High Court CWJC No.22452 of 2011 dt.04-10-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.22452 of 2011 =========================================================== Ram Kishore Singh Son Of Late Ram Chandra Singh, Resident of VillageBabhanbighaa, P.S.-Barbigha, District-Sheikhpura. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar.

2. The District Magistrate, Sheikhpura.

3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sheikhpura.

4. The Block Development Officer, Barbigha, District-Sheikhpura.

5. The Deputy Development Cmmissioner, Sheikhpura.

6. The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat, Sajas Khurd, Barbigha in the District of Sheikhpura.

.... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Rajendra Kr. Jha, GP18 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 04-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs - "(i) For quashing the order issued by the respondent no. 4 contained in Memo No. 1715 dated 30.11.2011 whereby the petitioner has been directed to deposit Rs. 2,09,853/- which is 20% of total dues i.e. Rs. 10,49,315/- in lieu of food grains allotted to the petitioner under "Total Rural Employment Scheme" within 2 days failing which an auction letter will be issued against the petitioner.

(ii) For further direction upon the respondent authorities not to act upon and take any coercive

Patna High Court CWJC No.22452 of 2011 dt.04-10-2018 action against the petitioner till disposal of the writ application.

(iii) For any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is found entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that pursuant to the orders of this Court, the Enquiry Commission headed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Udai Sinha (Retired) has now submitted its report and any further action in relation to recovery of the value of undistributed rice under the SGRY Scheme would abide by the decision of the State Government to be taken on the basis of such report.

4. In the above view of the matter, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to approach this Court afresh as and when the occasion arises in future.

5. Having regard to the stand of the petitioner, the writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.

6. Let the authorities refrain from taking coercive measures against the petitioner until decision is taken by the State Government, as aforesaid.

(Vikash Jain, J) Md. Ibrarul/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 08.10.2018 Transmission Date N.A.