Patna High CourtL.P.A/1439/2012dismissed

Third Eye Communication Pvt.Ltd. v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2015-08-18Justice Smt. Nilu Agrawal,Mr. Justice Navaniti Prasad Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.1439 of 2012 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2728 of 2012 =========================================================== Third Eye Communication Pvt. Ltd., having its registered office at 32, Vaibhav Apartment, Budh Marg, P.S. Kotwali, Town & District Patna, through its Director, Manoj Kumar Saraf, son of Late Laxmi Prasad Saraf Resident of 510, Shanti Vihar Apartment, Fraser Road, P.S. Kotwali, Town & District Patna.

.... .... Appellant/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna.

2. The Development Commissioner-Cum-Chairman, State Investment Promotion Board, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna.

3. The Principal Secretary, Urban Development & Housing Department, Government of Bihar, Vikas Bhawan, Patna.

4. Patna Municipal Corporation, Budh Marg, Patna, through its Municipal Commissioner-Cum-Chief Executive Officer.

5. The Municipal Commissioner-Cum-Chief Executive Officer, Patna Municipal Corporation, Budh Marg, Patna.

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Suraj Samdarshi, Advocate For the Respondent/s : None =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH And HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH) Date: 18-08-2015 The appellant has filed this Intra-Court Appeal

Patna High Court LPA No.1439 of 2012 dt.18-08-2015 against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 19.06.2012 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 2728/2012, declining to entertain the writ petition.

In our view, the learned Single Judge rightly noticed that the remedy available to the writ petitioner appellant was either to sue the Municipal Corporation for unauthorizedly terminating his contract and destroying its properties or file contempt, if it is made out, in view of earlier order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 5284/2009 vide order dated 04.05.2010.

We see no reason to take different view in the matter in the facts and circumstances aforesaid. This Letters Patent Appeal, thus, requires no interference. It is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn.

(Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.) (Nilu Agrawal, J.) Rajeev/N.A.F.R.