Disposed

Md. Imran Khan and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC5 Oct 2018CWJC/292/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court disposed of three concurrent writ petitions. The bench directed the concerned authority to consider a specific prior judgment and extend its benefit to the present petitioners if their facts were identical. The court observed that the facts were identical but did not explicitly decide the merits of the claims in this order.

What the court decided

AI extract

Md. Imran Khan and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Patna HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.292 of 2018

¶3

===========================================================

¶4

Md. Imran Khan Son of late Abdul Hamid Khan Resident of Islam Nagar Chuna Pur Road, Wali Tola, P.S. K. Hat, District- Purnea.

¶5

Anil Kumar Sharma Son of late Budhan Sharma Resident of Majhli Chowk, Tarbanna Madhubani, P.S. K. Hat, District- Purnea.

¶6

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Bihar , through the Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department , Bihar, Patna.

¶9

The District Magistrate, District- Purnea.

¶10

The Mayor Nagar Nigam Purnea District Purnea.

¶11

The Municipal Commissioner Nagar Nigam Purnea, through its Secretary, District- Purnea.

¶12

The Executive Officer Nagar Nigam Purnea District- Purnea.

¶13

.... .... Respondent/s

¶14

with

¶15

=========================================================== Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 13188 of 2017

¶16

===========================================================

¶17

Binod Lal Sah S/o Suresh Lal Sah, Resident of Mohalla-Rajendra Nagar, Madhubani, P.S.-K.Hat, District-Purnea.

¶18

Rupesh Kumar Singh S/o Shyam Narayan Singh, Resident of Mohalla-New Sipahi Tola, P.S.-K. Hat, District-Purnea.

¶19

Uday Pratap S/o Late Ramanand Singh, Resident of Mohalla-New Sipahi Tola, P.S.-K. Hat, District-Purnea. 4. Uday Pratap S/o Late Ramanand Singh, Resident of Mohalla-Navratan Hata, P.S.-K. Hat, District-Purnea.

¶20

Amit Kumar Jha S/o Triloknath Jha, Resident of Mohalla-Korathbari, P.s.-K.Hat, District-Purnea.

¶21

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶22

Versus 1. The State of Bihar Through the Principal Secretary,Urban Development Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶23

The District Magistrate, Purnea.

¶24

The Executive Officer/Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Purnea.

¶25

.... .... Respondent/s

¶26

with

¶27

=========================================================== Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 19370 of 2017

¶28

===========================================================

¶29

Md. Naushad Alam, Son of Md. Moinuddin, Resident of Purnea City Naka Chowk, P.S. Sadar, District- Purnea.

¶30

Patna High Court CWJC No.292 of 2018 dt.05-10-2018

¶31

2 /3

¶32

.... .... Petitioner/s

¶33

Versus

¶34

The State of Bihar through its Secretary, Urban Development Department, Bihar, Patna.

¶35

The District Magistrate, District Purnea.

¶36

Present Mayor Nagar Nigam Purnea District Purnea.

¶37

The Then Nagar Aayukt/Municipal Commissioner Nagar Nigam Purnea District Purnea.

¶38

Present Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam Purnea, Through its Secretary/Executive Officer, Nagar Nigam Purnea.

¶39

.... .... Respondent/s

¶40

=========================================================== Appearance : (In CWJC No.292 of 2018) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nadimul Hasan For the Respondent/s : Mr. Yogendra Prasad Sinha- AAG7 (In CWJC No.13188 of 2017) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Jha For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rajiv Roy - GP1 (In CWJC No.19370 of 2017) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nadimul Hasan For the Respondent/s : Mr. Kinkar Kumar - SC9

¶41

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT

¶42

Date: 05-10-2018

¶43

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶44

counsel for the State.

¶45

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the facts of the present cases 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 issue involved in the present cases.

¶46

In such view of the matter, the concerned authority is directed to examine the facts, law and prayer of the cases of the petitioners and if it is found that present case is squarely

¶47

Patna High Court CWJC No.292 of 2018 dt.05-10-2018

¶48

3 /3

¶49

covered by the aforesaid case, the same benefit should also be extended to the petitioners.

¶50

With the aforesaid observations and directions, these

¶51

writ petitions are disposed of.

¶52

(Shivaji Pandey, J)

¶53

Vinay/Sunny

¶54

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	NA
UploadingDate	8.10.2018
Transmission Date	NA

Md. Imran Khan and Anr. v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Md. Imran Khan 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sujata Vishwakarma Vs Chief Managing Director, U C O Bank and Ors.

Faiyaz Ahmad Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Shiv Raj Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Rajdeo Sah Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Sushil Chandra Tiwari Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ashok Kumar Singh and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.