Srikant Sharma v. The Chief Secretary Govt. Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15371 of 2014 =========================================================== Srikant Sharma, Son of Sri Sadhu Saran Singh, Resident of Village Main, P.O and P.S. Main, Block- Belaganj, District- Gaya, Retd. School Teacher- cum-Social Worker.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The Chief Secretary Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar.

3. The Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya.

4. The District Magistrate, Gaya.

5. The Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Gaya

6. The Circle Officer, Block- Belaganj, District- Gaya.

7. The Executive Engineer, Rural works Departments, Works Division, Tekari, Gaya.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. R. S. Pradhan, Senior Advocate Mr. Sanjeev Nikesh, Advocate Mr. Ranjeet Choubey, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Namrata Mishra, G.A.-13 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE And HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date: 11-05-2015 The petitioner is a resident of Main village of Gaya district. He filed this writ petition complaining that the respondents are constructing road over the land in Khata no.433, plot nos. 781, 2574, 2612, 1174, 1231 and 780, which is recorded as Bandh, Paien, Aahar. According to the petitioner, the land covers the storage tank, as well as drainage from it, and if the road is constructed blocking the drainage, serious problem would arise. The respondents filed a detailed counter affidavit. It is

Patna High Court CWJC No.15371 of 2014 dt.11-05-2015 2/2 admitted that the land referred to above, is recorded as owned by the Government. It is also stated that the road is constructed under the Pradhan Mantiri Gramin Sadak Yojana and small portion of the land has to be utilized for the purpose. The respondents further stated that drainage facility is not at all blocked, and that it would not be blocked in future also.

Heard Sri R. S. Pradhan, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Narmata Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents.

The apprehension of the petitioner was about the blocking of the drainage facility. The respondents have categorically stated that the facility is kept intact, and every care would be taken to ensure that the drainage is not blocked. With this, the grievance of the petitioner stands redressed. The writ petition stands closed.

(L. Narasimha Reddy, CJ) (Sudhir Singh, J) Sunil/- U