Sunil Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 9419 of 2015 ====================================================== Sunil Kumar Singh, S/o- Jai Prakash Singh, resident of Ram Mandir Colony, Obra, P.O.+P.S.+District- Sonebhadra (U.P). .... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The District Magistrate, Rohtas.
3. The Superintendent of Police, Rohtas.
4. The Authorized Officer-cum-D.F.O., Rohtas at Sasaram.
5. The Area Officer of Forest, Sasaram Forest Area, Sasaram.
6. Mr. Kamlesh Paswan, Incharge- Parasathua, O.P. District- Rohtas. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shri Prakash Srivastava For the Respondent/s : AC to GP - 15 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 2.
14-08-2015 Heard Sri Shri Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.C. to Govt. Pleader - 15. The petitioner, invoking writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has prayed for quashing of an order of confiscation i.e. Confiscation Case No. 18 of 2014 and alternatively, a prayer has been made for directing the respondent no. 2 i.e. District Magistrate, Rohtas to dispose of the appeal i.e. Appeal No. 37 of 2014. The petitioner has also made a prayer for directing for the provisional release of seized truck, however; at the time to argument, learned counsel for the petitioner confined his prayer to the extent of directing the appellate authority i.e. respondent no. 2 to decide the appeal
Patna High Court CWJC No.9419 of 2015 (2) dt.14-08-2015 2/2 expeditiously.
In view of limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the Court considers that without asking the respondents for filing counter affidavit, the writ petition can be disposed of.
Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with an observation that the appellate authority may take appropriate steps so that the appeal i.e. Appeal No. 37 of 2014 may be disposed of expeditiously, preferably; within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. (Rakesh Kumar, J.) Anay U