IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4824 of 2007 RAMA SHANKAR SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 5 02.07.2008 Petitioner by way of the present writ application wants a direction upon the respondent-authorities for implementation of a decision contained in Memo No. 364 dated 31.03.2006 issued under the signature of the Deputy Development Commissioner, Sheohar. By virtue of this decision a Panchayat Bhawan is supposed to come up in Ponjhia Gram Panchayat. Since no activity or follow up action has been taken up by the authorities, the petitioner approached this court. A counter affidavit has finally been filed after several indulgences on behalf of the respondents. They do not dispute that a decision to build the Panchayat Bhawan has been taken and they have taken certain steps also in this regard by seeking allocation of funds and administrative approval. The only reason according to them the actual implementation has been delayed is because one Mahesh Rai at whose land the said Panchayat Bhawan is to come up had not registered the land in the name of the governor. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has furnished the copy of the registration which was made on 23rd May, 2008. The counsel submits that the delay in registration was not because of lack of bonafide by the said person but because of a misplaced stand taken by the collector of 2 the district by demanding registration-fee as per the valuation of the land. However, now it is not in dispute that the authorities have a piece of parcel of land duly registered in the name of the governor of the State and only a follow up action is therefore required. The present writ application is disposed of with a direction upon respondent Nos.2 as well as 4 to take steps and see that the Panchayat Bhawan comes up at the shortest possible time. Since a decision in this regard was taken way back in 2006, it is hoped and expected that the building would come up hopefully within this financial year. The writ application stands disposed of with waiver of the cost which was imposed upon the State for non-filing of the counter affidavit on an earnest prayer made on behalf of the State counsel. MKr. (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)