IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.2525 of 2008 OM PRAKASH YADAV . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS . ----------- 2. 04.08.2010 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the opposite parties. The submission that the order in pursuance of the writ petition has not been passed by the District Magistrate but by another officer does not appeal to the Court in view of the fact that it records a finding that the State Government had declared an area of one Kilometer adjacent to the Sanctuary as safety zone and that the mining area leased to the petitioner was within 600 meters from the Sanctuary thus effectively within the safety zone area. That condition was imposed in the order on the writ petition itself. The second submission from the pleadings in para 10 of the contempt application that others on the same plot were being permitted to mine does not impress the Court in absence of proper assertion with names of the persons who were allegedly so operating. If the petitioner has any grievance on that score it shall be open for him, if so advised, to assail the same with better details in a freshly constituted writ application specially when the opposite parties in the show causes denies that any such operations were going on. The contempt application stands disposed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)