Dismissed

Vijay Kumar and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC2 Dec 2014CWJC/2704/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioners sought review of a show cause notice and proposed certificate proceedings issued by the Deputy Development Commissioner. The High Court held that no interference was required at this stage as the petitioners were merely directed to file a reply and had an opportunity to rebut charges. The writ petition was dismissed without merit.

What the court decided

AI extract

Vijay Kumar and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2704 of 2014

¶3

====================================================== 1. Vijay Kumar son of Sri Ram Balak Paswan, resident of villageSibipur, P.S.- Gaurichak, District- Patna 2. Jyoti Rani wife of Baijnath Kumar, resident of Bachahi, P.S.Madhubani, District- Madhubani .... .... Petitioner/s

¶4

Versus

¶5

1. The State of Bihar through the District Magistrate, Madhubani 2. The District Magistrate, Madhubani 3. The Deputy Development Commisisoner, Madhubani 4. The Senior-in-Charge Officer, Rahika Block, Madhubani Collectorate, Madhubani 5. The Programme Officer (Manrega), Rahika, Madhubani 6. A. Sami Ansari son of not known, resident of Gram Panchayat Raj Bachi, P.S.- Rahika, District- Madhubani

¶6

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance: For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amish Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anshuman Singh, GP-24 Mr. Rajeev Shekhar, AC to GP 24 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER

¶7

3 02-12-2014 The petitioners are aggrieved by an order dated 17.1.2014 passed by the respondent Deputy Development Commissioner, Madhubani bearing Memo No. 106 as contained in Annexure-7 to the writ petition whereby the petitioners have been asked to show cause as regarding the allegations set out in the notice. The petitioners also question the communication of the Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Additional District Programme Convener, MANREGA addressed to the Programme Officer, MANREGA dated 17.01.2014 placed at Annexure-6 to

¶8

Patna High Court CWJC No.2704 of 2014 (3) dt.02-12-2014

¶9

¶10

the writ petition whereby the directions have been issued for instituting certificate proceedings against the petitioners in case they fail to deposit the amount referred to in the report of the Senior Deputy Collector.

¶11

Insofar as the show cause notice as contained in Annexure-7 is concerned, the petitioners have merely been directed to file their reply and which does not require any interference at this stage. Insofar as the proposed action mentioned in Annexure-6 is concerned, the petitioners are possessed with regard to rebut the charges.

¶12

In the circumstances discussed, no cause for interference with the impugned notice is made out at this stage and the writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶13

(Jyoti Saran, J)

¶14

S.Sb/-

¶15

Vijay Kumar and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Vijay Kumar and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Baidyanath Thakur Vs the Union of India and Ors.

M/s Jai Maa Kali Timber and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Mahendra Narayan Das Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Prabhat Kumar Pandey Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Mohan Saw Vs The Bihar State Power holding Company Ltd.

Lalita Devi Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.