Patna High CourtCWJC/12090/2014disposed

Raj Mangal Mishra v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-01-28Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12090 of 2014 =========================================================== Raj Mangal Mishra Son of Late Chandan Mishra, Resident of Village- Bharpurwa, P.S.- Bijaipur, P.O.- Bharpurwa, District- Gopalganj. At present Resident of Mohalla- Bidyapati Nagar, Ram Nath Sharma Marg Ward No. 20, P.O.+ DistrictGopalganj .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

2. The Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

3. The Commissioner, Saran Division, Saran, Chapra

4. The District Magistrate, Gopalganj

5. The District Development Commissioner, Gopalganj

6. The District Programme Officer, Gopalganj

7. The Block Development Officer, Bijaipur Block, District- Gopalganj

8. The Programme Officer, MANREGA, Bijaipur Block, District- Gopalganj

9. Smt. Manju Devi, Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Raj Bharpurwa, Block Bijaipur, P.S.- Bijaipur, District- Gopalganj 10.The Panchayat Rozgar Sewak, Gram Panchayat Raj Bharpurwa, Block Bijaipur, P.S.- Bijaipur, District- Gopalganj .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.

For the State :

Mr. Jitendra Kumar, AC to AAG 14.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 28-01-2017 Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the State is present.

The petitioner has moved the Court for a direction to the authorities not to make construction on his private land. In view of the averments made in the counter affidavit that construction of the proposed road, which was initially built upon written consent given by the villagers, including the petitioner, has

Patna High Court CWJC No.12090 of 2014 dt.28-01-2017 2/2 been stopped at the place where the land of the petitioner begins, in view of the u-turn taken by the concerned.

In view of the aforesaid, the cause of action does not survive and the writ petition, having become infructuous, stands disposed off.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) Prakash/- AFR/NAFR U