← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/14326/2016disposed

Chandeshwar Prasad v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2025-06-25Mr. Justice Alok Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14326 of 2016 ====================================================== Chandeshwar Prasad Son of Sri Mahendra Prasad Resident of village - Anantpur, Ward No. 11, P.O. Amarpura, P.S. Naubatpur, District Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Engineer - in - Chief - Cum - Additional Secretary - Cum - Special Secretary, Rural Works Depar 3.

The Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division, Paliganj, District Patna 4.

The Circle officer, Naubatpur, District Patna ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. S.B.K. Mangalam, Adv For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Kumar Alok- SC7 Mr. Satyeshwar Prasad, AC to SC-7 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 25-06-2025 Heard Mr. S.B.K. Mangalam learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Satyeshwar Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to paragraph 12 of the counter affidavit filed by respondent-State which states as follows:- "12. That thereafter the Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division, Paliganj, vide letter dated 07.09.2016 has been directed the contractor to not do any work for construction of PCC-cum-drainage over the land in question. No PCC work or construction of drainage has been made over the aforesaid land

Patna High Court CWJC No.14326 of 2016(4) dt.25-06-2025 2/2 of the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, submits that in light of this statement made by the respondentState in paragraph 12 of the counter affidavit, the present writ application may be disposed of.

4. To this prayer being made by learned counsel for the petitioner, respondent-State does not have any objection.

5. As prayed for by learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ application is disposed of in light of the statement made in paragraph 12 of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent-State which is quoted hereinabove. (Alok Kumar Sinha, J) kiran/- U