Anil Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10791 of 2023 ====================================================== Anil Kumar Son of Sri Lal Babu Kumar Resident of Village and Post- Pakari Basarat via Deoria, P.S.- Sahebganj, District- Muzaffarpur 843120. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur.

3.

The Senior Superintendent of Police, Muzaffarpur. 4.

The Sub- Divisional Magistrate, West Muzaffarpur. 5.

The Sub- Divisional Police Officer, Saraiya, District- Muzaffarpur. 6.

The District Animal Husbandry Officer, Muzaffarpur. 7.

The Circle Officer, Sahebganj.

8.

The Officer-in-charge, Sahebganj.

9.

Harihar Bhagat, Son of Jhagaru Bhagat Resident of Village and Post- Pakari Basarat via Deoria, P.S.- Sahebganj, District- Muzaffarpur 843120. 10.

Shailendra Bhagat, Son of Harihar Bhagat Resident of Village and PostPakari Basarat via Deoria, P.S.- Sahebganj, District- Muzaffarpur 843120. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Priyadarshi Matri Sharan, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Sheo Shankar Prasad, SC 8 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 08-08-2024 Heard the parties.

2. The present writ petition has been been preferred for the grant of following reliefs:- "(i) For directing the respondents to ensure removal of poultry farm, with immediate effect, situated in purely residential area near the house of the Petitioner.

(ii) Further, for direction upon the Respondent to take immediate and appropriate action against the private respondent no.9 & 10, in accordance with law, to ensure that the life and personal

Patna High Court CWJC No.10791 of 2023(2) dt.08-08-2024 2/2 property of the Petitioner is protected in tune with the Right to decent environment including pollution-free water and air and protection against hazardous environment and industry."

3. The petitioner claims to be neighbour of respondent no. 9 and 10 who according to him are running poultry farm. The case of the petitioner is that they are not following the basic norm for running the poultry farm and as such he is running from pillar to post.

4. Certain documents have been incorporated ranging from the year 2016 to 2022 when the Sub-Divisional Officer, West Muzaffarpur, passed an order on 23.09.2022 in Case No. M2458 of 2016

5. If an order has come, it is the duty of the said official to take appropriate steps, this Court cannot pass any order on such matter where an appropriate enquiry is required followed by an appropriate action.

6. The present writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid observation.

(Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U