IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18722 of 2011 1. Suman Kumar Singh Diwakar Pd. Singh Borra, P.O. Chaknathu, P.S. Amdanda, Distt. Bhagalpur Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Bihar ,Patna 2. The Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 3. The Principal Secretary, Rural Engineering Organisation, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 4. The Executive Engineer, Rural Engineerring Organisation, Bhagalpur Works Division, Bhagalpur ---------------------------------- 03. 13.12.2011 The present writ petition is filed in the form of P.I.L. with the following prayer:- “ (i) For issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the Respondents concerned to take decision immediately for making and repairing the main road in length of 15 Kms from Ekchari (Kharhara) to Chakhamja comes under Sanhaula Block, District- Bhagalpur. (ii) For holding and declaration that such 15 Kms main road Ekchari to Chakamja is not motorable, even pedestrians can not walk through the said road easily and safely and such road is ignored by the Department since the day of independence. (iii) Also for holding and declaration that for interest of public said road “Ekchari to Chakhamja” in length of 15 Kms is dangerous, not movable and for bad condition of the road , the Respondents are responsible and for their latches the general public of the locality, both state of Bihar and Jharkhand are being affected. (iv)And/or pass such other order or orders as deem fit and proper in the interest of justice as well as public also.” 2 The petitioner sought direction upon the respondents to take decision for making and repairing the main road in length of 15 Kms from Ekchari (Kharhara) to Chakhamja comes under Sanhaula Block, District- Bhagalpur. It is also stated that a representation has been made on 4.2.2011 (Annexure-2 series) which is still pending unanswered. Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that the order passed by this Court on 14.11.2011 for filing counter affidavit has already been communicated by Fax to respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4 on 15.11.2011, but instruction has not been received as yet from the concerned respondents. Having observed so, in view of the fact that the representation is still pending, it would suffice if direction is given to respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4 to dispose of representation dated 4.2.2011. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner sought liberty of this Court to make a fresh representation. Accordingly such liberty is granted. If such representation is filed the same shall be disposed of by the respondents, as stated above, as expeditiously as possible. 3 With the above observation this writ petition stands disposed. P.K. (T. Meena Kumari, J.) (Vikash Jain, J.)