Disposed

Manoj Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC22 Jan 2024CWJC/1331/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought remedy under Section 157 of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act against a No Confidence Motion fixed for a special meeting. The High Court directed the District Magistrate to record members' signatures in his presence, hear affected parties and pass a speaking order; the meeting was stayed till decision.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed with directions: DM to verify signatures, hold hearing, decide Section 157 matter within one week; special meeting stayed till final decision.

Manoj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1331 of 2024

¶2

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

¶3

Manoj Kumar Son of- Ravindra Rai Resident of Village- Lautan Hasingpur, P.S.- Sakra, P.O. -Muraul, District - Muzaffarpur.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through its Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶8

The Commissioner, Tirhut Division District- Muzaffarpur.

¶9

The District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, District- Muzaffarpur.

¶10

The District Panchayat Raj Officer, Muzaffarpur, District- Muzaffarpur.

¶11

The Block Development Officer/Executive Officer, Muraul Muzaffarpur.

¶12

Lucky Kumari, w/o Rakesh Kumar through Block Development Officer/Executive Officer Muraul Muzaffarpur District- Muzaffarpur.

¶13

Prem Paswan, S/o Hanuman Paswan through Block Development Officer/Executive Officer Muraul Muzaffarpur District- Muzaffarpur.

¶14

Pooja Devi, W/o Santosh Takhur through Block Development Officer/Executive Officer Muraul Muzaffarpur District- Muzaffarpur.

¶15

Rupak Kumar, S/o Shiv Chandan Mishra through Block Development Officer/Executive Officer Muraul Muzaffarpur District- Muzaffarpur.

¶16

Kunal Gaurav, S/o Harihar Mahto through Block Development Officer/Executive Officer Muraul Muzaffarpur District- Muzaffarpur.

¶17

Rakesh Kumar, S/o Kapileshwar Ram through Block Development Officer/Executive Officer Muraul, Muzaffarpur District- Muzaffarpur.

¶18

Priyanka Kumari, W/o Rabindra Kumar Rai through Block Development Officer/Executive Officer Muraul Muzaffarpur, District- Muzaffarpur.

¶19

Parvati Devi, W/o Sonu Paswan through Block Development Officer/Executive Officer Muraul Muzaffarpur District- Muzaffarpur.

¶20

Babita Kumari, W/o Hari Om Kishore Nishad through Block Development Officer/Executive Officer Muraul Muzaffarpur District- Muzaffarpur.

¶21

Avdesh Kumar Singh, S/o Nand Kishore Mehta through Block Development Officer/Executive Officer Muraul Muzaffarpur District- Muzaffarpur.

¶22

... ... Respondent/s

¶23

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dinu Kumar, Advocate : Ms. Ritika Rani, Advocate : Mr. Himja Gautam Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Pleader 5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH

¶24

Patna High Court CWJC No.1331 of 2024(2) dt.22-01-2024

¶25

2/3

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

2 22-01-2024 Heard Mr. Dinu Kumar, Ms. Ritika Rani and Mr.

¶28

Himja Gautam Singh learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned GP-5 for the State.

¶29

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner seeks to avail remedy under Section 157 of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 (hereinafter to be referred as the ‘Act’) before the District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, for the relief(s) as prayed for in the present writ petition.

¶30

Considering the limited relief(s) as sought for by the petitioner, the District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, is directed to call for the records relating to the Panchayat Samiti of concerned Block and fix a date within two days after communication of this order for the attendance of Pramukh, Uppramukh and all the members of the Panchayat Samiti and seek their signature in his own presence and thereafter, he may fix a date for providing opportunity of hearing to the affected parties and decide the matter considering the charges as contained in the requisition. If he finds that there is violation of manner, as prescribed under Section 44 or Section 46 of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 and same requires interference in any manner with respect to calling of ‘No Confidence Motion’,

¶31

Patna High Court CWJC No.1331 of 2024(2) dt.22-01-2024 3/3

¶32

which has been fixed on 23.01.2024, the District Magistrate after providing opportunity of hearing may pass a speaking order strictly in accordance with law within one week from the date of attendance filed by all the members.

¶33

The special meeting dated 23.01.2024 shall lose its operation till final decision is taken by the District Magistrate.

¶34

As the order has been passed in the open Court, learned counsel for the State must ensure to communicate this order forthwith to the District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, as well as, to the Block Development Officer, Muraul without waiting for pronouncement of the order.

¶35

Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed

¶36

of.

¶37

(Purnendu Singh, J.)

¶38

Ashishsingh/-

¶39

Manoj Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pramila Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Gaurave Kumar Alias Gaurave Kumar Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Munna Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Lalan Kumar, Vs The State of Bihar

Madhu Devi Vs The Bihar State Election Commission

Mukul Kumar and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Anr.