IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19585 of 2013 With I.A. No.3276 of 2014 With I.A. No.5720 of 2014 With I.A. No.8581 of 2014 Rajpal Mishra, son of Late Sadanand Mishra, resident of Village + P.O.- Hatni, P.S.- Ghoghardiha, District- Madhubani....... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Panchayati Raj, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Divisional Commissioner, Darbhanga. 4. The District Magistrate, Madhubani. 5. The District Panchayati Raj Officer, Madhubani. 6. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Phulparas, District- Madhubani. 7. The Circle Officer, Ghoghardiha, Madhubani....... Respondent/s Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Mishra Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary For the Respondent-State : Mr. M.K. Singh, AC to SC-6 For the Intervener : Mr. Gagandeo Yadav CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 2 21-01-2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition has been filed inter alia, for a direction to the respondents to construct the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan for Gram Panchayat Raj, Naua-Bakhar in the district of Madhubani over khata no.358, khesra no.1176 which, according to the petitioner, is a Gairmazarua Aam land. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan is being constructed on different plot although in
Patna High Court CWJC No.19585 of 2013 (2) dt.21-01-2015 2 the Aam Sabha a decision was taken for construction of the Panchayat Bhawan over plot no.1176. An intervention application bearing I.A. No.3276 of 2014 has been filed by one Gulab Kamat who claims title over the said plot and raises objection on the construction of Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan on the said plot. Having regard to the circumstance that a decision as to the situs of a Panchayat Bhawan or the likes lies entirely within the jurisdiction of the Panchayat concerned and the State Government who have exclusive jurisdiction to take a decision in this regard and taking note of the dispute as regarding the title/ownership over the plot in question, this Court would refrain from issuing any direction and the petitioner, if so advised, may approach the appropriate authority for the redressal of his grievances. The writ petition and the interlocutory applications are accordingly disposed of. SKPathak/- (Jyoti Saran, J) U
Patna High Court CWJC No.23833 of 2013 (2) dt.09-12-2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.23833 of 2013 1. Ram Kishor Thakur S/O Late Anand Thakur Resident Of Village Gopalpur, P.S. Moro, District Darbhanga 2. Ram Hit Mandal S/O Late Shital Mandal Resident Of Village Rajwara, P.S. Moro, District Darbhanga 3. Hosla Prasad Singh S/O Late Lakshmi Kant Singh Resident Of Village Gopalpur, P.S. Moro, District Darbhanga 4. Bikram Kumar Singh S/O Mukund Singh Resident Of Village Bishunpur, P.S. Moro, District Darbhanga 5. Raj Kumar Jha S/O Late Mahabir Jha Resident Of Village Gopalpur, P.S. Moro, District Darbhanga...... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through Its Chief Secretary, Patna 2. The Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 3. The Director, Panchayat Raj, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 4. The Collector, Darbhanga 5. The District Development Commissioner, Darbhanga 6. The Anchal Officer Hanuman Nagar, District Darbhanga 7. The Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Raj, Godaipatti, Anchal Hanuman Nagar, District Darbhanga...... Respondent/s Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amarendra Narayan For the Respondent/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Keshri CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA And HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILESH KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA) 2 09-12-2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. We are of the considered opinion that location of Panchayat Bhawan is more of an executive policy matter and it is not for us to decide whether one location is better than the other. There is no complaint for violation of any statutory provision.
Patna High Court CWJC No.23833 of 2013 (2) dt.09-12-2013 If petitioners opine that there are suitable lands available where they would like the Panchayat Bhawan to be constructed, it is for them to pursue matters before the executive about which we make no observation. The writ application stands disposed. (Navin Sinha, J) Manish/- (Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18446 of 2013 1. Bhup Narayan Thakur Son Of Late Ramrekha Thakur Resident Of Village - Jagapakar, Police Station - Harsidhi, District - East Champaran...... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayati Raj, Bihar, Patna 2. The District Magistrate East Champaran At Motihari 3. The Block Development Officer, Harsidhi, At And P.O. Harsidhi, District - East Champaran 4. The Anchal Adhikari, Harsidhi, At And P.O. Harsidhi, District - East Champaran...... Respondent/s Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shakti Suman Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. Devendra Kr Sinha CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA) 2 26-09-2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The location of a Panchayat Bhawan is for the executive to decide and not for the Court to supplant its opinion. It shall be wholly inappropriate exercise of Public Interest Jurisdiction to usurp executive powers to decide the location of the Panchayat Bhawan. There are no allegation for violation of any statutory rules and regulations. The representation of the petitioner dated 27.8.2013, itself reveals that the alleged road is not used for communication and the Halka Karamchari had reported that encroachments already
2 Patna High Court CWJC No.18446 of 2013 (2) dt.26-09-2013 2 / 2 exist upon the same. If the petitioner is still of the opinion that the Panchayat Bhwan is being constructed on a Public road as is contended, he can pursue his remedy before the appropriate authority as he has already represented on 27.8.2013 before respondent no. 2. The application stands disposed. (Navin Sinha, J) (Vikash Jain, J) P. Kumar/-