IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6905 of 2002 MITTU SAO @ MITTU PARTNER, SON OF LATE ISHWAR DAYAL SAO, R/O MOHALLA ALAMGANJ CHOWKI, GOSAINGHAT GALI, P.S. ALAMGANJ, P.O.-GULZARBAGH, PATNA CITY, DISTRICT- PATNA. ........................ PETITIONER Versus 1. THE ADMINISTRATOR,PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, PATNA. 2. THE DY. ADMINISTRATOR, PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, PATNA. 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, PATNA. ....................... RESPONDENTS ----------- 4. 18.4.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for Patna Municipal Corporation. The petitioner has filed this writ application for the following relief: “The present application is for issuance of writ/command/direction commanding the respondents to allot and settle the petitioner in the Hariyali Vegetable Market, Antaghat for selling vegetables etc. forthwith as per the decision of the Hon’ble Court as well as the District Administration.” The basis for filing such writ application is the two earlier orders of this Court dated 29.3.2000 and 5.7.2000 in C.W.J.C.No. 10368/1998. It is also the case of the petitioner that certain decision pursuant to the aforementioned order was 2 taken in the meeting held on 7.8.2001 but the petitioner was still not given the benefit of such a decision. The petitioner claims that he is also a settlee and for this purpose he has placed reliance on the rent receipt No. 3518 dated 18.4.2002, as contained in Annexure 5. Counsel for the Patna Municipal Corporation despite expiry of a period of almost seven years has not been able to file a counter affidavit. The two orders dated 3.10.2002 and 17.5.2007 directing the Patna Municipal Corporation to file counter affidavit have made no impact on the authorities of the Corporation. This Court cannot keep on waiting for filing the counter affidavit. While deprecating such non-cooperative attitude of Patna Municipal Corporation in causing obstruction dispensation of justice by not filing the counter affidavit in time, this Court would find that in the facts of this case the authorities of Patna Municipal Corporation are required to take a firm and final decision as to whether the petitioner would qualify for being allotted space for 3 carrying out his occupation of a vegetable vendor in terms of the policy decision of the Patna Municipal Corporation. The petitioner, therefore, may approach the authorities of Patna Municipal Corporation by filing a comprehensive representation enclosing of his evidence in support of his claim, whereafter such representation must be considered and disposed of by a speaking order within three months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. Let it be made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner and would only expect the authorities to take a final decision as indicated above. This application, accordingly, stands disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/