IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18967 of 2011 Chousa Prakhand Matsyajiwi Swablambi Sahkari Samity Ltd. Fulaut, P.S. Chousa, District-Madhepura Through Its Chief Executive Namely-Parmanand Choudhary, Son Of Late Chanchal Choudhary Resident Fo Village Fulaut, P.S. Chousa, District-Madhepura. ….. Petitioner Versus 1. The Union Of India through Its Secretary, Surface and Transport Department, Government of India, New Delhi. 2. The Executive Engineer, National Highway Division, N.H. 106, Madhepura. 3. The Assistant Engineer, National Highway Sub Division Madhepura, District-Madhepura. 4. The State Of Bihar. 5. The Commissioner-Cum-Secretary, Department Of Animal Husbandry and Fishery Bihar, Patna. 6. The Director, Department Of Animal Husbandry And Fishery Bihar, Patna. 7. The District Fishery Officer-Cum-Chief Executive Officer, Madhepura. 8. The Collector, Madhepura. 9. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Udakishunganj, District- Madhepura. 10. The Circle Officer, Chousa, P.S. Chousa, District- Madhepura. …… Respondents For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Archana Jha, AC to GP 17 2 21.11.2011 The case of the petitioner is that in view of the decision already taken by the Executive Engineer, National Highway, Madhepura Division, the jalkar concerned has been transferred to the Fisheries Department on 24.9.2007. However, a notice as contained 2 in Annexure 6 has been published on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 and 3 inviting bids for settlement of concerned jalkars. However, it is fairly stated that the settlement of the concerned jalkar, as per the aforesaid notice, was going to be done on 6.9.2011 but that date has lapsed and thereafter no further notice has admittedly come up again for the said purpose at the behest of the respondent nos. 2 and 3. Thus, learned counsel for the petitioner, seeks permission to withdraw this writ application with a liberty to challenge any notice for settlement of the concerned jalkar by the respondent nos. 2 and 3, if the same is published in future. Learned counsel appearing for the State does not have any objection. As a result, this application is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty granted to the petitioner to prefer a fresh writ application, if as mentioned above, any cause of action arises in future. Spd/- ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)