← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/11696/2016dismissed

Daya Shankar Tiwari v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-04-04Mr. Justice Sudhir Singh,The Chief Justice2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11696 of 2016 =========================================================== Daya Shankar Tiwari S/o Late Baidya Nath Tiwari, R/o Muhalla- Dr. Vimal Gali, Sheikhpura, Veena Palace, Flat no.-303, P.S.-Shastri Nagar, District-Patna .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Principal Secretary, Urban Devlopment Department, Bihar, Patna

3. The District Magistrate, Patna

4. The Town Commissioner, Patna Municipal Corporation, Patna .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance:

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate. For the Respondents 1-3 : Mr. P.K. Verma, AAG 3 and Mr. Ujjwal Kumar Sinha, AC to AAG 3.

For the Respondent no.4 : Mr. Prasoon Sinha, Advocate. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date: 04-04-2017 Petitioner has filed this petition in Public Interest and the grievance of the petitioner is that certain constructions have been made by private builders in Mazar Gali Sheikhpura and in Ashiana Plaza in gross violation to the statutory rules. The constructions have been made without sanction of the map and in collusion with the authorities of the Municipal Corporation.

2. Except for making vague and unspecific allegations to say that the constructions have been made in violation to the rules, the petitioner does not indicate his standing as a socially and public

Patna High Court CWJC No.11696 of 2016 dt.04-04-2017 2/2 spirited person and does not point out any specific statutory provision which is said to have been violated. That apart, taking note of the manner in which the petition has been filed, we are not inclined to take up the issue at the instance of the petitioner in this Public Interest Litigation. We would consider the issue if brought to our notice by a public spirited person whose credentials and locus standi are to the effect that we feel satisfied that it is not a sponsored litigation.

3. Keeping in view the aforesaid, this Writ Petition stands disposed of.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Sudhir Singh, J) Dilip, AR.

AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date Transmission Date