Ashok Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18794 of 2021 ====================================================== Ashok Kumar Singh, Son of Late Chandra Deo Singh, Resident of VillageGopalpur, P.O.- Mohamadpur, P.S.- Bikram, District- Patna, Pin Code801104. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, New Secretariat, Patna.

2.

The Certificate Officer (Mines) - cum- Addl. District Magistrate (Law Order) Collectorate (Hindi Bhawan), Patna.

3.

The Mineral Development Officer, Patna.

4.

The Assistant Director Mines Patna.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajendra Prasad, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Gyan Prakash Ojha (GA-7) Mr. Shushil Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Mines : Mr. Naresh Dikshit, Advocate Mr. Brij Bihari Tiwari, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH) 22-11-2021 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The Certificate Officer, Mines-cum- Additional District Magistrate (Law and Order), Patna has issued a notice dated 18.08.2021 under Section 7 of Bihar and Orrisa Public Demand Recovery Act, 1946 to one Ashok Kumar, son of Sita Ram Singh, resident of Gopalpur under Bikram Police Station of the district of Patna. The petitioner claims that he is son of

Patna High Court CWJC No.18794 of 2021(2) dt.22-11-2021 2/2 late Chandra Deo Singh, resident of Village Gopalpur under Bikram Police Station of the district of Patna. He is seeking quashing of the said notice dated 18.08.2021, issued to Ashok Kumar, as according to him the notice has been handed over to the petitioner's servant.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that he is being harassed by the respondents treating him to be the judgment debtor, which he is not.

4. In our opinion, this writ application seeking quashing of a notice addressed to someone else is completely misconceived. If the petitioner has any grievance against the harassment meted out to him by the respondents for any reason, he has the liberty to approach the appropriate forum in accordance with law.

5. The writ application is accordingly disposed of. (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) ( Madhuresh Prasad, J) Rajesh/- U