IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9853 of 2002 JAGMOHAN CHAUDHARY Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 4. 21.4.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner. A dispute as to whether the petitioner had committed breach of terms of the agreement or such breach of terms had been committed by the Municipality cannot be gone into within the jurisdiction of Article 226 of the Constitution of India. That apart it has been categorically stated and asserted in the counter affidavit by the Municipality that well before filing of the writ petition the shop in question had already been allotted to a third person and yet the petitioner has not impleaded the said allottee as a party to the writ petition. In absence of the allottee this writ petition with regard to enforcement of a right against that very shop which has already been allotted in favour of third person cannot proceed. The last plea of the petitioner that he is now ready to deposit a sum of Rs. 10,000/- can be better gone into by the Municipality and therefore, the petitioner, 2 if so advised, may file an application before the Special Officer of the Municipality who will look into the grievance of the petitioner and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of four months from the date of filing of the aforesaid application by the petitioner. With the aforementioned observation/direction, this application stands disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/