Kameshwar Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10456 of 2013 ===========================================================

1. Kameshwar Singh S/O Late Bhola Singh R/O Sai Kripa Building, Ward No. 22, P.O. And P.S.- Gopalganj, District- Gopalganj (Bihar) .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Urban Development and Housing, Government of Bihar, Patna

2. The Nagar Parishad, Gopalganj through its Executive Officer Nagar Parishad, Gopalganj, District- Gopalganj

3. The Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Gopalganj, District- Gopalganj .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Saket Tiwari, Adv. For the Nagar Parishad : Mr. Ravi Bhushan Verma, Adv. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 02-05-2016 The petitioner had complained that his ingress and egress from the nursing home has been closed by the municipality. It was submitted by Mr. Saket Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner that the approach road utilized by the petitioner for his nursing home is being closed by the municipality.

Mr. Ravi Bhushan Verma, learned counsel appearing for the municipality defended their action by submitting that the grievance is misplaced for there is an alternative approach road available to the petitioner and the road in which he seeks a passage is passing through the municipality premises.

In view of the disputed stand taken by the parties they were directed to support their respective stand through sketch maps and

Patna High Court CWJC No.10456 of 2013 dt.02-05-2016 2/2 photographs and which has since been placed on record and while the municipality demonstrates that there is absolutely no impediment to the approach to the house of the petitioner named as Sai Kripa, on query being made to Mr. Tiwari as regarding the action complained of, he refers to the passage shown at Annexure-8 of the supplementary affidavit which by look itself shows no obstruction created by the municipality.

The predicament expressed, is misplaced. The writ petition is disposed of.

(Jyoti Saran, J) Bibhash/- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 20.05.2016 Transmission Date