IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10184 of 2009 Shailesh Kumar, son of Bangali Singh, Boring Canal Road, PS SK Puri, Dist. Patna – Petitioner. Vs. (1) Patna Municipal Corporation through Municipal Commissioner, Patna Municipal Corporation, Maurya Lok, Patna. (2) Municipal Commissioner, Patna Municipal Corporation, Maurya Lok, Patna. (3) Vigilance Officer, Patna Municipal Corporation, Maurya Lok, Patna. (4) Baidyanath Mishra (Retd. I.A.S.), son of Ram Parikshan Mishra, resident of Behind IDIA Building, West Boring Canal Road, PS SK Puri, District Patna – Respondents. … For the petitioner: Mr. Jairam Singh, Advocate. For the Corporation: Shri Shekhar Singh, Advocate. For respondent no.4: Mr.SBK Mangalam, Mr. Shashi Nath Jha and Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocates. … 20 25.11.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. In this case a dispute has arisen between the petitioner and respondent no.4. The petitioner has filed this writ petition stating that respondent no.4 has wrongly obtained sanction from the Patna Municipal Corporation showing that the road in front of his building is 20’ whereas it is 10’ wide at present. Counsel for the petitioner submits that on the basis of this wrong information given to the Patna Municipal Corporation the respondent has got the plan sanctioned. It has also been contended that the road between the building of the petitioner and the respondent is a private road meant for use of the inhabitants of the two buildings belong to the petitioner and respondent no.4. In other words, it is contended that the road is not a public road and as such there is no provisions under the Patna Municipal Act or 2 By-laws for widening of such roads. On behalf of the respondent, it is submitted that as per the By-laws, even assuming that there is no provision for widening of a private road, he has left a set off 5’. It is argued that the petitioner in fact has not made any provisions, by leaving a set off . On behalf of the petitioner it is submitted that as far as his building is concerned, it opens on East Boring Road and there is already more than 20’ wide road in front of his building and as such he does not need to leave 5’ as set off in front of his building and there is no requirement under the law to leave 5’ land on the back side of the road. The dispute in hand should be resolved by the Patna Municipal Corporation when they pass a final order in the vigilance cases pending before them. This issue would require that the Patna Municipal Corporation should hear both the parties together so that a clear picture emerges after they have made their respective submissions regarding this aspect of the matter. This writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation and direction. haque ( Sheema Ali Khan, J .)