IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.10 of 2009 Vijay Krishna s/o Laxmi Narayan Pd. Singh, r/o village – Kadibigha, P.S. – Rahui, Nalanda …. Appellant Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Deptt. of Mines and Minerals, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3. D.M., Nalanda 4. The Mining Officer, Nalanda, Biharsharif 5. The Assistant Mining Officer, Nalanda, Biharsharif 6. The Dy. Development Commissioner, Nalanda, Biharsharif 7. The B.D.O., Rahui Block, Nalanda 8. The Bihar State Pollution Control Board, Patna through Chairman 9. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Forest and Environment Department, New Delhi 10. Central Pollution Control Board, through its Chairman ………….. Respondents ----------- For the Appellant : Mr. Devendra Pd. Sinha, Sr. Advocate Mr. Pramod Kr.Sinha, Advocate For the State Mines: Mr. V.M.K.Sinha, Spl. P.P. with Mr. Satya Prakash Tripathy, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shiv Kumar, G.A.VIII For the Intervenor : Mr. Ashok Singh, Mr. Rajendra Prasad, Advocates For the respondent no.8: Mr. Shivendra Kishore, Advocate For respondent no.10: Mrs. Binita Singh, Advocate --- 4 2-3-2009 Writ petitioner – appellant aggrieved by the order dated 24th November, 2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWJC. No.13733 of 2006 has preferred this appeal under Clause – 10 of the Letters Patent. Writ petitioner – appellant filed writ application for a direction to the State Government to - 2 - purchase bricks from him only on the ground that he is the only licensed brick-kiln operator in the district. It was his allegation that the State Government in the district of Nalanda is purchasing bricks from such brick-kiln owners, who do not have the license. The manner in which brick-kilns were operated came to be severely criticized by the learned Single Judge but he had not passed any order directing the State Government to take supply from the writ petitioner – appellant and aggrieved by the same, he has preferred this appeal. Mr. D.K.Sinha, appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that as the appellant is the only licensed brick-kiln operator, the learned Single Judge ought to have given a positive direction for purchase of bricks from him only. Counter affidavit has been filed in this appeal, in which it has been stated that there are one hundred five (105) licensed brick-kiln operators in the district. Assistant Counsel to Government Advocate – VIII, further states that bricks shall be purchased from - 3 - the licensed brick-kiln operators only. In that view of the matter, the prayer made by the appellant to purchase bricks from him only cannot be granted but, as undertaken, it shall be purchased from the licensed brick-kiln operators. Needless to state that if the appellant competes with other licensed brick-kiln operators, his offer shall also be considered. Appeal stands disposed off with the observation aforesaid. Neyaz/- C. K. Prasad, ACJ. Dharnidhar Jha, J.