Patna High Court
Murlee Mehta vs The State Of Bihar on 5 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9881 of 2020
======================================================
Murlee Mehta, son of Late Mangal Mehta, resident of Village- Jhilla Dumri
(Ghadhia), Ward No. 13, P.S. Bhaptiyahi, District- Supaul.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj
Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
3. The District Magistrate, Supaul.
4. The Circle Officer, Saraigarh, Bhaptiyahi, District- Supaul.
5. The Block Development Officer, Saraigarh, Bhaptiyahi, District- Supaul.
6. The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Jhilla Dumri, Saraigarh, Bhaptiyahi, P.S.-
Bhaptiyahi, District- Supaul.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Mishra, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Lalit Kishore, A.G.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 05-01-2021
Petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):-
"For issuance of direction against the respondents
to immediately stop the illegal and unjustified
construction of another 'Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan'
at an ineligible place which is also against the
departmental guidelines, and/order any other reliefs
for which the petitioner is found entitled to in the
facts and circumstances of this case."
Learned counsel for the State opposes the
Patna High Court CWJC No.9881 of 2020 dt.05-01-2021
petition stating that the petition is misconceived; raises disputed
question of fact; is not in public interest; and that the issue can
be best resolved at the Government level by the appropriate
authorities.
After the matter was heard for some time,
learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner shall be
content if a direction is issued to the concerned respondent(s) to
consider and decide the representation which the petitioners
shall be filing afresh for redressal of the grievance(s).
Learned counsel for the respondents states that if
such a representation is filed by the petitioner within a period of
two months from today, the authority concerned shall consider
and dispose it of expeditiously and preferably within a period of
three months from the date of its filing along with a copy of this
order.
Equally, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to
take recourse to such alternative remedies as are otherwise
available in accordance with law.
We are hopeful that as and when petitioner takes
recourse to such remedies, as are otherwise available in law,
before the appropriate forum, the same shall be dealt with, in
accordance with law and with reasonable dispatch.
Patna High Court CWJC No.9881 of 2020 dt.05-01-2021
Needless to add, while considering such
representation, principles of natural justice shall be followed
and due opportunity of hearing afforded to the parties.
Liberty reserved to the petitioner to approach the
Court, if the need so arises subsequently on the same and
subsequent cause of action.
We have not expressed any opinion on merits.
All issues are left open.
The proceedings, during the time of current
Pandemic- Covid-19 shall be conducted through digital mode,
unless the parties otherwise mutually agree to meet in person i.e.
physical mode.
The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid
terms.
Interlocutory Application(s), if any, also stands
disposed of.
(Sanjay Karol, CJ)
( Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
sujit/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 05.01.2021
Transmission Date
