Patna High CourtCWJC/16187/2016disposed

Nirmal Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-03-29Mr. Justice Sudhir Singh,The Chief Justice2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 16187 of 2016 =========================================================== Nirmal Kumar Singh Son of Late Kapil Deo Singh Resident of VillageDhanchhuhan, P.O.- DhanChhuhan, P.S.-Chauri, District-Bhojpur .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. The Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar

3. The Principal Secretary, Co-operative Department, Govt. of Bihar

4. The Joint Secretary, (Head Quarters) Co-operative Societies, Bihar, Patna

5. The District Collector, Bhojpur, Ara

6. The District Co-operative Officer, Bhojpur, Ara

7. The Circle Officer, Sahar, Bhojpur

8. Revenue Clerk Gram Panchayat Dhanchhuhan, Circle Sahar, Bhojpur

9. The Chairman Primary Agriculture Co-operative Credit Society, Dhanchhuhan Sahar, Bhojpur .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr Ranjeet Tiwary, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr Ravi Bhardwaj, GA 13 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE And HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date: 29-03-2017 From the averments made by the petitioner, we find that respondent No 4, the Joint Secretary (Headquarters), Cooperative Societies, Bihar, Patna, according to petitioner's own showing, has issued direction to respondent No 6 for proceeding with the matter. If respondent No 6 is not taking any action, as directed by respondent No 4, respondent No 3, being the Principal Secretary of the Department, is empowered under law to get his order enforced.

Patna High Court CWJC No.16187 of 2016 dt.29-03-2017 2/2 Petitioner can either point out these facts to respondent No 4, the Authority who passed the order or to respondent No 3, the Principal Secretary of the Department who can always issue directions to respondent No 6 to comply with the order.

2 We are hopeful that in case the petitioner approaches respondents No 3 and 4, they shall pass necessary orders executing and implementing the earlier order.

3 With the aforesaid liberty to reapproach respondents No 3 and 4 to pass an order executing and implementing the earlier order, this application is disposed of.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Sudhir Singh, J) AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 03.04.2017 Transmission Date M.E.H./-