Dismissed

Sri Krishna Singh v. The Union Of India and Ors.

Patna HC6 Dec 2019CWJC/20458/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a writ for access to a public path blocked by defence officers. The court allowed withdrawal of the petition, reserving liberty to seek an alternate route via the Divisional Commissioner, but dismissed the writ.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed to withdraw petition; liberty reserved to approach Divisional Commissioner for alternate route.

Sri Krishna Singh Vs The Union Of India and Ors. — Public Procurement and Tenders | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20458 of 2018

¶2

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

¶3

Sri Krishna Singh S/o Rameshwar Singh R/o Village- Mahendra Niwas, P.S.Race Course, South Chakkar Maidan P.S.- Kazi Mohammadpur, Dist.Muzaffarpur.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi

¶7

The Government of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶8

The Colonel, Administrative Commandant for Station Commander, Muzaffarpur.

¶9

The Defence Estate Officer, Danapour Cant, Patna.

¶10

The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur.

¶11

The Senior Superintendent of Police, Muzaffarpur.

¶12

The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, East, Muzaffarpur.

¶13

The Station Head Officer, P.S. Kazi Mohammadpur, Muzaffarpur.

¶14

... ... Respondent/s

¶15

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dinu Kumar, Advocate Mrs. Jyotsna Rani Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. S.D. Sanjay, ASGI Mr. Rajesh Kumar Verma, ASG For the State : Mr. Manish Kumar, A.C. to AAG-6 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and

¶16

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL JUDGMENT

¶17

(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶18

Date : 06-12-2019

¶19

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶20

counsel for the respondents.

¶21

Petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

¶22

“i. For issuance of appropriate writ, order, direction for commanding upon the respondents concerned to allow the residence of Dakshin Chakkar

¶23

Patna High Court CWJC No.20458 of 2018 dt.06-12-2019 2/4

¶24

Muzaffarpur to use the only pathway/rasta which extends from Chandmari to Prabhat Tara School towards Chakkar chowk which is currently prohibited by the Defence officers for use by the locals as a result of locking the residents in their locality without the proper rasta for commutation affecting their right to way.

¶25

ii. For a direction to the respondent defence officers concerned who have blocked the only Aam Rasta used by the residents of Dakshin Chakkar Maidan Muzaffarpur to make it open for use of the local resident for commutation purpose in the light of the order passed in the Misc. case no. 31/2012-13 and the order vide memo no. 164 dated 20.1.2014 issued by Collectoriat Muzaffarpur by which there was a direction and order to the concerned respondent Defence officers not to obstruct the Aam Rasta which had been in use since time memorial.

¶26

iii. For a direction to the respondent defence officers to implement the order passed by the Collector Muzaffarpur dated 14.5.2013 passed in the light of the order passed in CWJC No. 6099 of 2012 dated 5.4.2012 whereby a direction was given not to obstruct the Aam Rasta concerned in the interest of public at large.

¶27

iv. For a direction to the concerned defence respondent to allow the local resident of Dakshin Chakkar Muzaffarpur to use the only pathway which was constructed by the Bihar Government around the Chakkar Maidan in the land of race course for

¶28

Patna High Court CWJC No.20458 of 2018 dt.06-12-2019 3/4

¶29

communication.”

¶30

In so far as the instant petition is concerned, making out grievance against the defence personnel and the authorities, we find no merit therein.

¶31

Learned Additional Solicitor General vehemently opposes the writ petition.

¶32

We notice that there is an allegation in the counter affidavit of the petitioner having assaulted the army personnel as also encroached the defence land.

¶33

At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, under instructions, contends that petitioner is interested in having an alternate route, from the land other than which is sought to be utilized for defence purposes or in the possession of public authorities.

¶34

Learned counsel for the petitioner further prays that petitioner be permitted to withdraw the present petition reserving liberty to approach the authorities for finding an alternate route of ingress and egress.

¶35

Learned Additional Solicitor General states that it is not that the petitioner is landless. There is a road; whether it is motorable or not and is convenient or not is a different matter.

¶36

Well, without going into the merits thereof, at this

¶37

Patna High Court CWJC No.20458 of 2018 dt.06-12-2019 4/4

¶38

stage, we allow the petitioner to withdraw the present petition reserving liberty to approach the Divisional Commissioner, Muzaffarpur for venting out his grievance with regard to alternate route, which the petitioner desires to have from the land other than that of the defence or public land.

¶39

We hope and expect that the petitioner’s grievance shall be redressed expeditiously and positively within a period of six months in accordance with law.

¶40

The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

¶41

(Sanjay Karol, CJ)

¶42

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J)

¶43

P.K.P./-

¶44

AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date	09.12.2019
Transmission Date

Sri Krishna Singh v. The Union Of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Krishna Singh v. The Union Of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hemni Devi @ Hima Devi Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Neelam Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Suresh Singh and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Subodh Nath Singh Yadav @ Sobh Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Biswas Electric Works Vs Principal Commissioner

Pankaj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar