IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9555 of 2003 Bikendra Kumar son of late Ram Bilas Chawrasia resident of Mohalla- New Karbigahia, behind N.T.P.C., P.S.- Jakkanpur, District- Patna – Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Executive Officer, New Capital Circle, Patna Municipal Corporation, Patna. 3. Patna Municipal Corporation, Patna. 4. Chief Executive Officer, Patna Municipal Corporation, Patna. 5. Municipal Commissioner, Patna Municipal Corporation, Patna ---- Respondents. ----------- 8/ 07-01-2011 Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction that the respondents be directed to reinstall Stall no. 17 in the east of Swadeshi Cloth House, New Market, Station Road, Patna and to pay the cost of damages sustained by the petitioner due to illegal removal of the stall from there. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent Patna Municipal Corporation after having entered into an agreement with one Chunilal Chowrasia permitted him to keep a wooden stall on a rental basis at the place in question and also permitted him to run his business in that wooden stall. The petitioner claims that the aforesaid Chunilal Chowrasia was paying rent to the respondent Municipal Corporation and he was issued rent receipt for the same. It is further 2 claimed that aforesaid Chunilal Chowrasia continued his business in the aforesaid wooden stall for a quite long period and subsequently, due to his old age, he transferred the aforesaid stall in favour of the petitioner on the basis of certain agreement arrived between them. Thereafter, the petitioner applied for mutation of his name and accordingly, his name was mutated with respect to aforesaid stall in question vide Annexure-5. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that by virtue of general directions issued by this Court in the case of Arun Kumar Mukherjee vs. State of Bihar & Ors., the wooden stall in question was removed on the ground that the petitioner had encroached upon the public land. The petitioner claims that he had valid right and title over the wooden stall and the respondent-authorities could not have removed the same on the ground of illegal encroachment by the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent- Patna Municipal Corporation submits that in compliance of the order passed by this Court, actions taken by the authorities cannot be said to be illegal. However, he agrees that if the petitioner files a representation, raising his grievance with respect to stall in question, the authorities would consider his grievance and would pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. 3 6. In the aforesaid background, Mr. Devendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition with a liberty to file a representation before the respondent- Municipal Commissioner, Patna Municipal Corporation. 7. Permission is accorded. 8. If such a representation is filed by the petitioner within a period of one month from today, then the respondent- Municipal Commissioner, Patna Municipal Corporation shall be obliged to consider the same in accordance with law and pass a speaking order, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of filing such representation. 9. With the aforesaid observation/direction the writ petition stands disposed of. BTiwary/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)