Suresh Prasad Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1401 of 2016 ====================================================== Suresh Prasad Singh, S/o Late Bujhawan Singh, Resident of Village - Rukanpura, Bailey Road, P.S. - Rupaspur, District - Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through District Magistrate, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate, Patna.

3. The Circle Officer, Danapur, Patna.

4. Patna Municipal Corporation, Maurya Lok Complex, Patna through the Municipal Corporation.

5. The Vigilance Officer, Patna Municipal Corporation, Mauryalok Complex, P.S. - Kotwali, District - Patna.

6. Shri Rajeshwar Singh, S/o Late Nabi Lal Singh, Resident of Mohalla - Rukanpura, Bailey Road (Opposite Rukanpura Musahri School), P.S. - Rupaspur, District - Patna.

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. N.K. Malhotra, Sr. Advocate Mr. Binod Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Jai Shankar Barnwal,G.A.-5 For P.M.C. : Mr.Prasoon Sinha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) 23-02-2016 Heard Mr. N.K. Malhotra, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Jai Shankar Barnwal, learned Government Advocate No.5, appearing for the respondent-State. Also heard Mr. Prasoon Sinha, learned counsel for the respondent-Patna Municipal Corporation.

The grievance of the writ petitioner, made in this writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in the nature of Public Interest Litigation, relates to encroachment of

Patna High Court CWJC No.1401 of 2016 (4) dt.23-02-2016 2/2 public path/public road.

Having regard to the facts pleaded in this writ petition, the materials on record and, having heard learned counsel for both the parties, we find that the subject matter of this writ petition is fully covered by the observations made, and the directions given by us in the case of Sanjay Jha Vs. The State of Bihar and Others, reported in 2016 (1) PLJR 248. In view of the above and in the interest of justice, it is hereby directed that respondent No.2, namely, District Magistrate, Patna, and respondent No.3, namely, the Circle Officer, Danapur, Patna, shall act, in the present matter, in accordance with law, keeping in view the observations made and the directions given in the order, dated 24.11.2015, aforementioned.

In view of the above, this writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

(I.A. Ansari, ACJ) (Anjana Mishra, J) PNM U