IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.646 of 2008 SANJAY SINGH & ORS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the appellants: Mr. Kamal Nayana Choubey, Sr. Advocate Mr. Ambuj Nayan Choubey For the State : Mr. M.S. Mishra, GP- X For the Patna Municipal Corporation: Mr. Bishwa Bibhuti Kumar Singh --- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice And Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal --- Dated, the 9th September, 2008 We heard the senior counsel for the appellants and the counsel for the Patna Municipal Corporation. 2. There may be some merit in the submission of the senior counsel for the appellants (petitioners) that by a public notice the settlements, which were operative for the period from 2006-07 until 2009 – 10, could not have been terminated; such procedure is violative of the principles of natural justice. But, in our opinion, this illegality by itself does not entitle the appellants to a relief in high prerogative writ jurisdiction of this court. It is so, because by quashing the public notice, illegality would be perpetuated inasmuch as although the law provides for settlement for a period of one year only, the appellants (petitioners) would have continued with the settlements in contravention of law for three years. Moreover, the 2 termination of settlement took place after one year. 3. Seen thus, we are of the view that the dismissal of the writ petition by the single judge does not call for any interference in appeal. 4. Our observations are confined to the consideration of the matter in high prerogative writ jurisdiction and we clarify that should the appellants approach the civil court for damages, any observation made by us will not come in their way. 5. The appeal is dismissed in limine. R. M. Lodha, CJ. Kishore K. Mandal, J. Neyaz/