IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.19140 of 2011 Savitri Devi, W/O Sri Upendra Prasad, resident of Mohalla-Adars Nagar, also known as Jaiprakash Nagar, Bhooth Nath Road, P.S. Agamkuan, District –Patna. . . . . . Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Patna Regional Development Authority, later on merged with Patna Municipal Corporation, Patna, through its Commissioner. 3. The Addl. Town Commissioner, Patna Municipal Corporation, Patna. 4. The Executive Engineer, Patna Municipal Corporation Patna. 5. The Collector, Patna. 6. The Vice-Chairman P.R.D.A. Patna. . . . . . Respondents. For the Petitioner : M/s Durgesh Nanda, : Mr. Ram Nath Saran, Advocates. For the P.M.C. : Mr. H.S. Himkar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Vivek Kr. Rana, AC to SC XI ----------- 2/ 23.11.2011 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make necessary correction in paragraph 3 of the writ application. Heard Mr. Durgesh Nandan, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for Patna Municipal Corporation and State of Bihar. In the instant writ application, the petitioner prays for quashing order dated 08.08.2011 passed in Case no. 47 A of 2006 (Annexure-11), whereby the learned Municipal Commissioner directed the petitioner to demolish the residential building, as the same has been constructed without due sanction of map. The petitioner submits that after due permission he purchased the land appertaining to khata no. 272, Plot no.186, Tauzi no.126, Thana no.12 situated at Mauza Kumahrar, P.S. Agamkuan measuring 1 katha, 12 dhurs and 10 durki vide registered sale deed dated 21.09.1994 and the land was mutated in his favour and got electric connection etc. The petitioner 2 submits that even the Patna Municipal Corporation has passed the order of mutation of holding, as well. The petitioner submits that he has got Land Possession Certificate and no encumbrance certificate as well. Counsel for the Corporation submits that the petitioner has an alternative remedy by way of appeal under Section 323 (3) of the Patna Municipal Act, 2007. As an alternative remedy of appeal is available, in my view, the petitioner should approach the appellate authority. In case, if the petitioner files an appeal, the same would be considered after condoning delay in filing appeal, as the petitioner was pursuing remedy before this Court. Status quo as of today would be maintained for three weeks. This application stands disposed of. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)