← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/18054/2024disposed

Umesh Ray v. The State Of Bihar

2024-12-02Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18054 of 2024 ====================================================== 1.

Umesh Ray Son of Late Kodai Ray, Resident of Village- Nandna, Anchal and Police Station - Minapur, District- Muzaffarpur. 2.

Vinay Narayan Shahi, Son of Tej Narayan Shahi, Resident of VillageNandna, Anchal and Police Station - Minapur, District- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur.

3.

District Panchayati Raj Officer, Muzaffarpur. 4.

Deputy Development Commissioner, Muzaffarpur. 5.

Block Development Officer, Minapur, District- Muzaffarpur. 6.

Anchaladhikari, Minapur, District- Muzaffarpur. 7.

The Mukhia, Gram Panchayat Raj, Nandana Panchayat, DistrictMuzaffarpur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Manoj Kumar Ambastha, SC-26 Mr. Subodh Kumar, AC to SC-26 Mr. Divit Vinod, AC to SC-26 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 02-12-2024 The grievance of the petitioners are that the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan has been proposed to be constructed on a piece of land other than that donated by the petitioners for the specific purpose of construction of Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan.

2. Learned counsel for the State submits that the policy has already been settled by the State Government regarding construction of the Punchayat Sarkar Bhawan as well as selection of the land for this purpose. He submitted that the

Patna High Court CWJC No.18054 of 2024(2) dt.02-12-2024 2/2 Division Bench of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 8361 of 2023 dated 20.06.2023 has held that it is a policy decision and it cannot be challenged under writ jurisdiction.

3. Accordingly, the writ application is disposed of with the observation that the petitioner if so advised may raise his grievance before the appropriate authority.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Guddu/- U