IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1099 of 2005 SAROJ KUMAR @ MADAN LAL ADVOCATE SON OF VIJAY KUMAR @ BIJAY KAMAL JEE, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA CHOWK BAZAR P.S. KOTWALI, P.O. G.P.O. MUNGER, DISTRICT MUNGER – PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY, OLD SECRETARIAT BUILDING, PATNA. 2. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MUNTER. 3. SRI PAWAN KUMAR MANDAL, EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE, SADAR MUNGER. 4. ASHOK KUMAR SWARNKAR SON OF LATE NARAYAN PRASAD SWARNKAR, RESIDENT OF GULZAR POKHAR P.S. KOTWALI, P.O. G.P.O. MUNGER, DISTRICT MUNTER. 5. VIJAY KUMAR @ VIJAY KAMALJEE, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA BEKAPUR, P.O. G.P.O. MUNGER, P.S. KOTWALI, DIST. MUNTER – RESPONDENTS. ----------- 2/ 06-05-2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel No. 12, appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 2. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition, raising a grievance against the notice dated 07.12.2004 (Annexure-3) issued by Executive Magistrate, Sadar, Munger, whereby the petitioner has been asked to show cause as to why he was creating obstruction in the business of respondent no. 4 and was preventing him from opening his shop given to him on rent through an agreement by respondent no. 5, owner of the house, who is none else, but the father of the writ petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits 2 that though notice was issued in the year 2004 and petitioner was asked to show cause within two days, failing which consequential administrative and legal action was contemplated, but till date no consequential action has been taken against the petitioner and the matter is still pending before respondent Executive Magistrate. According to him, in view of nature of dispute, for which impugned notice has been issued by respondent Executive Magistrate, his entire actions seem to be wholly without jurisdiction and issues involved can be decided only by a civil court of competent jurisdiction. 4. After hearing the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner should file a show cause before respondent Executive Magistrate, if any such proceeding is still pending. If such a show cause along with a certified copy of the present order is filed within a period of four weeks from today, the respondent Executive Magistrate shall be obliged to dispose it of by a speaking order in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and all concerned including respondent no. 4 and 5. If the Executive Magistrate comes to a finding that with respect to property in question, some civil suit is pending, then in that case, he will dispose of the proceeding leaving all the issues to be decided by the civil court. Entire exercise must be completed by him 3 within a period of three months from the date of filing of such representation. 5. However, if the petitioner does not appear and does not file his show cause within the time prescribed by this Court with a certified copy of the present order, then it shall be construed that the present writ petition has finally been rejected by this Court. 6. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of. BTiwary/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)