IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3887 of 2010 1. Ranjit Kumar Srivastava S/O Late Ramesh Prasad Lalla R/O Railway Q.No. 261/L/A, Emergency Colony, P.S.- Sahayak, Distt.- Katihar. Petitioner. Versus 1.General Manager N.F. Railway, Malegaon, (Assam) 2.Estate Officer/Den II/Kirk N.F.K. Railway Office Of D.R.W. (W), Kir, P.S. Sahayak, Distt.- Katihar 3.D.M., Katihar 4.DEN/C/(N.F. Railway, Katihar), Railway Office Of D.R.W. (W), Kir 5.Commandant R.P.F., Katihar. Respondents. ----------- 2. 30.6.2011. None had appeared on behalf of the petitioner either on 28.6.2011 or on 29.6.2011 nor is any one present today when the matter is taken up. Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Railways was present. The writ petition was filed seeking an order of this court permitting the petitioner to retain the quarter allotted to his father. It is an admitted position that the father of the petitioner expired as back as on 6.11.2006 and whereafter under order dated 15.1.2007 (Annexure-3), the petitioner was permitted to retain the quarter for 24 months since the death of his father and which period expired on 5.11.2008. On his non vacation of the quarter on expiry of the period, a show case notice was 2 issued to him, copy whereof is placed at Annexure-8. The issue also gave rise to a proceedings under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’ and under which, the petitioner was directed to vacate the quarter. The petitioner preferred an appeal giving rise to Misc.Appeal.No.5 of 2009 which upon consideration, was rejected by the District Judge, Katihar vide order passed on 16.12.2009 placed at Annexure-1 of the writ petition. Regard being had to the facts, I am of the opinion that sufficient period of retention has been allowed to the petitioner to stay in the quarter allotted to his late father and he should vacate the same in terms of the order passed by the authorities under the Act and confirmed by the District Judge, Katihar in Misc.Appeal.No.5 of 2009. The writ petition being devoid of merit, is dismissed accordingly. ahk (Jyoti Saran, J.)