Navin Kumar Singh And ORS v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15155 of 2017 ===========================================================
1. Navin Kumar Singh, Son of Late Nutan Kumar Singh, Resident of Bari Hat, P.S. K. Hat, District- Purnea.
2. Anil Mehtar, Son of Late Shankar Mehtar, Resident of Mehtar Toli, Bari Hat, P.S. K.Hat, District Purnea.
3. Misri Mehtrani, W/o late Shanker Mehtar, Resident of Mehtar Toli Bari Hat, P.S. K. Hat, District- Purnea.
4. Ramu Mehtar, Son of Manori Mehtar, Resident of Argra Chowk Madhubani, P.S K. Hat, District- Purnea.
5. Vishwajeet Kumar Singh, Son of Late Ramchandra Prasad Singh, Resident of Bari Hat, P.S. K. Hat District- Purnea.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department, Bihar, Patna.
2. The District Magistrate, District Purnea.
3. Present Mayor Nagar Nigam Purnea District Purnea.
4. The then Nagar Aayukt/Municipal Commissioner Nagar Nigam purnea District Purnea.
5. Present Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam Purnea, through its Secretary/Executive Officer Nagar Nigam Purnea. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nadimul Hasan, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Abbas Haider-SC6 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 05-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the facts of the present case are identical to the case of C.W.J.C. No. 3933 of 2017 (Amit Kumar Rastogi & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.), the aforesaid judgment squarely covers the
Patna High Court CWJC No.15155 of 2017 dt.05-10-2018 2 /2 issue involved in the present case.
In such view of the matter, the concerned authority is directed to examine the facts, law and prayer of the case of the petitioners and if it is found that present case is squarely covered by the aforesaid case, the same benefit should also be extended to the petitioners.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.
(Shivaji Pandey, J) Vinay/Sunny AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date8.10.2018 Transmission Date NA