Bedami Devi v. The Union Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15536 of 2024 ====================================================== Bedami Devi, Wife of Late Yogendra Paswan, Resident of Village - Tineri, Nadaul, P.S.- Masaurhi, District - Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Union of India Through the Chief Engineer, (Construction), East Central Railway, Danapur, Patna.

2.

The State of Bihar through the Director, Land Acquisition, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The District Magistrate cum Collector, District - Patna. 4.

The Land Acquisition Officer, District - Patna. 5.

The Block Development Officer, Block- Masaurhi, District- Patna. 6.

The Circle Officer, Masaurhi, District - Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shaishav Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Additional Solicitor General ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 08-10-2024 Heard the parties.

2. Learned Advocate for the petitioner after some argument fairly submitted that with regard to the grievance raised before this Court the petitioner alongwith one another person had earlier preferred C.W.J.C. No. 566 of 2019 wherein the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 23.04.2024 given liberty to them to move before the appropriate authority i.e. respondent no. 4 for the redressal of their grievance.

3. The Court having taken into account the delay in approaching the Court on the part of the petitioner, restrained to

Patna High Court CWJC No.15536 of 2024(2) dt.08-10-2024 2/2 issue any specific direction.

4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner contended that despite the representation filed on behalf of the petitioner in view of the liberty granted by this Court vide order dated 23.04.2024, till date, no order has been passed compelling the petitioner to approach before this Court.

5. Learned Advocate for the State, as well as Railway submit at the Bar that since the petitioner has already approached before the concerned authority, who is in seisin of the matter, shall consider the application of the petitioner and dispose of the same.

6. Considering the submissions advanced, this Court does not find any reason or occasion to entertain the present writ petition.

7. If the representation of the petitioner has not been disposed off, the petitioner has appropriate remedy available under the law.

8. The writ petition stands closed.

(Harish Kumar, J) supratim/- U