IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8833 of 2011 Sidheshwar Yadav, son of late Riti Yadav, resident of Villae-Ner, Police Station-Makhdumpur, District- Jehanabad ----- Petitioner. Versus 1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Government of India, Transport Bhawan, I, Parliament Street, New Delhi- 110001. 2. The Chairman, National Highways Authority of India, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Government of India, G-5 & 6, Sector-10, Dwaraka, New Delhi- 110045. 3. The Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna-1. 4. The Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya. 5. The Collector, Jehanabad. 6. The District Land Acquisition Officer, Jehanabad. ---- Respondents. ----------- 2. 17.5.2011 Heard Mr. Vijoy Kumar for the petitioner, and learned Assistant Counsel to Mr. Anjani Kumar, Additional Advocate General No.10 for respondent nos. 3 to 6. This writ petition has been preferred for grant of the following reliefs: “(a) For directing the respondents to construct a new bye pass towards the western side of the Ner Village in the Makhdumpur block in the district of Jehanabad, Bihar for National Highways No.83 (Patna-Gaya-Dobhi Khand) after acquiring lands with due process. (b) For directing the respondents to not widening the present highways/road into four lanes or up to 200 feet in the Ner village in the Makhdumpur Block in the district of Jehanabad, Bihar situated at the 2 National Highways No.83 (Patna-Gaya- Dobhi Khand). (c) To grant such other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner may be found entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in the interest of public.” We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. It appears to us that the petitioner is objecting to the widening of the existing road, and instead prays that a bye- pass road may be constructed on the western side of the village as has been done with respect to four other villages nearby. We are of the view that these are functions of the executive and engineering domain, which this Court finds it difficult to determine in exercise of writ jurisdiction. Secondly, the courts normally do not interfere with development work The writ petition is dismissed. Vinay/ ( S. K. Katriar,J. ) ( S. P. Singh, J.)