IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10152 of 2002 BHUNESHWAR PRASAD YADAV, SON OF LATE LALU PRASAD YADAV, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA-BARI KESHOPUR WARD NO. 20, P.S.- JAMALPUR, DISTRICT-MUNGER ............................................... PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH SECRETARY-CUM-COMMISSIONER, URBON DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, MUNGER. 3. THE DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, MUNGER. 4. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, MUNGER. 5. THE SPECIAL OFFICER, JAMALPUR MUNICIPALITY, JAMALPUR. ................................ RESPONDENTS 1ST SET 6. SMT. NEELAM SAHA, WIFE OF SHRI SURYA NARAIN MANDAL. 7. SMT. ANURUPA SAHA, WIFE OF SHRI RAM LAL SAHA. 8. CHEDNI DEVI, WIFE OF LATE RAJENDRA PRASAD. ALL RESIDENTS OF MOHALLA-BARI KESHOPUR, NEAR EASTERN RAILWAY MIDDLE SCHOOL NO. 2, WARD NO. 20, P.S.-JAMALPUR, DISTRICT-MUNGER ................................... RESPONDENTS 2ND SET ----------- 4 23/4/2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner, counsel for the Official respondent Nos. 1 to 5 as also counsel for private respondent nos. 6 to 8. In this writ application prayer of the petitioner is for giving direction to the official respondents to demolish the illegal construction of house of the private respondents and encroachment of municipal lane (Gali no. 7734) especially in front of house of the petitioner. The petitioner, in fact, has also sought for enforcement of an order passed by the Special Officer, Jamalpur Municipality dated 3.10.2001 wherein all the parties were directed to construct their drain in front of their own house and also cover it. This Court by orders dated 27.11.2002 and 25.5.2007 2 has already given two opportunities to the respondents to file their counter affidavit, but till date no counter affidavit has been filed. Mr. Ajoy Kumar Sinha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the private respondents submits that whatever order was given by the Special Officer Municipality in relation to the construction of drain has already been complied by the private Respondents. Counsel for the petitioner would seriously controvert this submission. Both sides, however, are making such submissions on the basis of old instruction given to them by their clients. Keeping this writ petition pending, however, will now serve no purpose because municipal rules and regulations as with regard to construction of drain are quite specific. Such drain for discharge of water from the respective houses have to be constructed by the person concerned and therefore this Court would direct that if the petitioner still has grievance of not complying the order of the Special Officer as contained in Annexure-5, he would file a fresh representation before the Special Officer of the municipality along with a copy of this order, whereafter the Special Officer will do the needful to ensure that his earlier order as contained in Annexure-5 is complied with in the letter and sprit by all concerned within a fixed time limit. In the event, such order of the Special Officer is not complied by any party, the municipality will be at liberty to take appropriate steps 3 as per municipal law and may also take recourse for demolition of any portion which would be necessary for ensuring free flow of water. With the aforementioned observations and directions this application is disposed of. Abhay Kumar (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)