IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION CASE No.2158 of 2011 ====================================================== Alok Chamaria, son of late Ram Gopal Chamaria, resident of Mohalla – Company Sarai, Ward No. 2, Sasaram, P.O. & P.S. – Sasaram, District – Rohtas .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Culture, Govt. of India, Janpath, New Delhi – 110011, 2. The Director General of Archaeology, Archaeological Survey of India, Ministry of Culture, Govt. of India, Janpath, New Delhi – 110011, 3. The Superintendent of Archaeology, Archaeological Survey of India, Patna Circle, Anta Ghat, Judges’ Court Road, Patna, 4. The State of Bihar through the Collector, Rohtas at Sasaram, PO & PS – Sasaram, District – Rohtas and 5. The Conservation Assistant, Sasaram Circle, PO & PS - Sasaram, District - Rohtas .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Shrivastava, Advocate. For the respondent nos.1-3: Mr. Sudhir Kumar Tiwary, Advocate. For the State : Mr. G.K. Agrwal, GA 10 & Mr. Kumar Ravish, AC to GA 10. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 4 21-07-2011 The petitioner has filed this application for revival of CWJC No. 11271 of 2006. CWJC No. 11271 of 2006 was filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in Public Interest. The grievance was in respect of restoration and maintenance of the Mausoleum of emperor Sher Shah Suri and his father Hasan Shah Patna High Court MJC No.2158 of 2011 (4) dt.21-07-2011 2 / 2 2 at Sasaram, District – Rohtas. The said petition was disposed of by this Court (Coram: R.M. Lodha, CJ, as His Lordship then was, and Kishore K. Mandal, J) on 17th November 2008 in terms of several directions issued by the Court. It is the complaint of the petitioner that the aforesaid directions are not carried out in letter and spirit. Therefore, the petition be revived. We are of the opinion that the ends of justice shall be met if the petitioner is permitted to file a fresh petition in the same subject matter. For the aforesaid reason, without prejudice to the rights and contentions raised by the petitioner, this petition is disposed of. The petitioner will be at liberty to file a substantive writ petition in the subject matter and to agitate all the issues including the issues raised in the present petition. Dilip. (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)