IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4187 of 2006 1. MUKHU MAHTO, SON OF LATE BATHU MAHTO. 2. SIYALAL MAHTO, SON OF LATE BATHU MAHTO, 3. GIRIJA DEVI, WIFE OF JAI MANGAL MAHTO, 4. JAGDISH MAHTO, SON OF LATE BATHU MAHTO, 5. RAJ KUMARI DEVI, WIFE OF GANESH MAHTO, 6. MAHESH MAHTO, SON OF LATE BATHU MAHTO, 7. AJANASIYA DEVI, WIFE OF LATE SRILAL MAHTO, 8. SARSWATI DEVI, WIFE OF RAJESHWAR MAHTO. ALL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MAN SINGHPUR, P.O.- RAJOULI, P.S.- HAJIPUR SADAR, DISTT.- VAISHALI :---PETITIONERS. Versus 1.THE STATE O BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY, MAIN SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 2. THE SECRETARY, RELIEF AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE SECRETARY, NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, SARDAR PATEL BHAWAN, SABSAD MARG, NEW DELHI-110001. 4. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, VAISHALI AT HAJIPUR. 5. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, VAISHALI AT HAJIPUR. 6. THE FIRE BRIGADE OFFICER, VAISHALI AT HAJIPUR :---RESPONDENTS. ----------- 2. 03.03.2011. In view of the statement made in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Collector, Superintendent of Police and the Circle Officer, I am not inclined to proceed any further with the matter as petitioners have been compensated for the loss suffered by them. In case petitioners are aggrieved by the quantum of compensation, they are at liberty to file civil suit for adequate compensation. With the observation above, the writ application is disposed of. P.K.P. (V.N.Sinha,J.)