Dismissed¶25

Sageer Alam v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC10 Jul 2026CWJC/1409/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court; CWJC No.1409 of 2025; Sageer Alam v. State of Bihar & Ors.; decided 10-07-2026 by Ranjan Kumar Jha, J.; street vendor / hawkers; footpath shop; livelihood; petty items (chicken, egg, vegetable); 40-50 years possession; representation dated 20.09.2016 by third party; delay/laches (ten-year lapse); no prayer for consideration of representation; street vendors welfare schemes not invoked; harassment allegation against Md. Nasir Miya and brothers with SSP Nawada dragged in; personal dispute; writ petition misconceived; dismissed with liberty to approach appropriate authority; no costs; no statute or precedent discussed.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; petitioner given liberty, if so advised, to approach the appropriate authority for redressal of his grievances. ¶25

Sageer Alam Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief; petitioner given liberty, if so advised, to approach the appropriate authority for redressal of his grievances.

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents can be commanded not to disturb the petitioner and others from holding shops of petty items (chicken, egg, vegetable etc.) to earn their livelihood, the shops being held for 40-50 years.

¶20

Court's answer

The application relied upon by the petitioner was of 20.09.2016 and made by someone else; the writ petition was filed after a lapse of ten years; and although counsel argued during hearing that the matter be inquired into on the basis of the 2016 representation, there was no prayer in the writ petition for a direction to consider that representation.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition appeared to be more a means to settle a personal dispute between two parties, wherein the name of one police official (Senior Superintendent of Police, Nawada) had been dragged.

¶22

Key takeaways

On the facts and circumstances, the Court held the writ petition to be fully misconceived.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (CWJC No.1409 of 2025, Patna High Court, decided 10-07-2026, Ranjan Kumar Jha, J.) by a street vendor seeking a command to the State and district authorities of Nawada not to disturb him and others from running shops of petty items (chicken, egg, vegetables) allegedly held for 40-50 years to earn their livelihood. The Court noted that the only material relied upon was an application dated 20.09.2016 which was made by someone other than the petitioner, that the writ petition was filed after a lapse of ten years with no prayer for consideration of that representation, that the representation itself admitted the shop ran on the footpath of a road, and that post-2016 government welfare schemes existed for accommodating street vendors which the petitioner had not invoked. Observing that the petition appeared designed to settle a personal dispute with one Md. Nasir Miya and his brothers, dragging in the name of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Nawada, the Court held the writ petition fully misconceived, dismissed it, and granted the petitioner liberty to approach the appropriate authority for redressal of his grievances.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1409 of 2025

¶2

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

¶3

Sageer Alam Son of Late Talim Uddin Resident of Village- Teli Tola, P.S.Hisua, District- Nawada.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Urban Housing Department, Government of Bihar.

¶7

The Deputy Development Commissioner-Cum- Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Nawada.

¶8

The District Magistrate, Nawada.

¶9

The Sub- Divisional Officer, Nawada.

¶10

¶11

The Circle Officer, Town Block, Nawada.

¶12

The District Board, Nawada through its Chairman.

¶13

The Secretary, District Board, Nawada.

¶14

... ... Respondent/s

¶15

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

¶16

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mrigendra Pratap Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Advocate (10) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶17

2 10-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶18

This writ petition has been filed for following

¶19

reliefs:

¶20

“ For commanding the respondents not to disturb the petitioner and other from holding shops of petty items like chicken, egg, vegetable etc. to earn their livelihood as they are holding the shops from last 40-50 years.”

¶21

Patna High Court CWJC No.1409 of 2025(2) dt.10-07-2026 2/3

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is being harassed by one Md. Nasir Miya and his brothers in connivance with Senior Superintendent of Police, Nawada and in this connection he referred to one application that is of 20.09.2016, and that too by someone else and thereafter, after lapse of ten years the present writ petition has been filed. Although, there is no prayer in the writ petition that a direction for consideration of said representation. During the course of argument counsel representing the petitioner submitted that the matter to be inquired on the basis of representation filed in 2016. At the same time, the representation referred and relied upon by the counsel for petitioner itself admits that the shop is being run on footpath of a road. After 2016 much water flows and government has came out with many welfare schemes for accommodating street vendors instead of invoking those remedies/rights, the petitioner is sitting over the matter. This writ appears to be more to settle personal dispute between two parties wherein name of one police official has also been dragged.

¶23