IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.462 of 2009 RAJA RAM PASWAN S/O SRI PABITAR PASWAN, R/O VILLAGE KANHI BIGHA, PS- HILSA DISTT-NALADNA---PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE SECY, DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYATI RAJ, GOVT. OF BIHAR, 3. THE DIRECTOR,DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYATI RAJ,GOVT.OFBIHAR 4. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,NALANDA 5. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NALANDA 6. B.D.O.,HILSA, NALANDA-----------RESPONDENTS ----------- 2 5.8.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. In the present writ application the petitioner is aggrieved by the initial notice dated 5.9.2008 issued to him by the district authority as to why a proceeding under section 18(5) of the Bihar Panchayati Raj Act, 2006 be not initiated. Annexure-1 dated 6.12.2008 thereafter was passed by the District Magistrate by which he has recommended for initiation of a proceeding under section 18(5) of the Act. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the District Magistrate has no authority to issue any notice or ask for a show cause under section 18(5) of the Act. Learned counsel for the State however submits that District Magistrate may not have the power but nothing bars the District Magistrate to ask for initiating a proceeding under section 18(5) of the Act by the competent authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner informs the Court that no proceeding under section 18(5) of the Act has been initiated till date to his knowledge. That being so, the issue is only academic and any - 2 - decision in the present writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India will be premature. In case a proceeding under section 18 (5) of the Act is initiated based on the notice issued earlier, the petitioner may seek appropriate remedy against that order. This writ application stands dismissed with the said liberty. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)