IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15248 of 2005 Baijnath Singh Yadav, son of Late Pranwashi Singh Yadav, village Pakwa Enar, Naya Bhojpur, PS Dumraon, district Buxar .. Petitioner. Vs. 1. The State of Bihar, 2. The Secretary, Forest & Environment Department, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna. 4. The District Magistrate, Buxar, 5. The Subdivisional Officer, Dumraon, Dist. Buxar. 6. The Block Dev. Officer, Dumraon, Dist. Buxar. 7. The Circle Officer, Dumraon, Dist. Buxar. 8. Mod. Sohrab Quraishi, son of Late Fazal Quraishi, village Pakwa Enar, Naya Bhojpur, PS Dumraon, district Buxar .. Respondents. For the petitioner : Mr. SP.Mukherjee, Sr.Advocate & Mr.S.Pratap,Adv. For the State : Mr. Lalit Kishore, A. A. G. III. For respondent no. 8 : Mr.Surendra Kr.Singh & Mrs.Sudha Singh, Advocates. 11 6.3.2009 Heard the parties. From the report and earlier order of this court as contained in Annexures 2 and 4 respectively, it is clear that the private respondent has been using his premises as a place to store animal bones since many years and this premises were actually situate quite away from the residential part of the village or locality. After obtaining a report from the Subdivisional Officer, this court in 1998 quashed the order under section 133 of the Cr.P.C. passed by the Executive Magistrate against the private respondent. This is second round of litigation raising a similar grievance that the premises of the private respondent are a source of nuisance and, therefore, the petitioner’s prayer should be allowed and a writ be issued for directing various authorities to ensure that the respondent’s business is closed at that particular place. Having considered all the relevant aspects of the matter 2 and the earlier report and the order, we find no right in the writ petitioner to seek such a remedy. In fact the private respondent has a legal right to use his premises for carrying out his profession which he appears to be pursuing since long. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed as one without merit. It is always open for sensible neighbors to work out a compromise on agreed terms. If the petitioner is really interested along with other inhabitants that the premises of the private respondent may be shifted, they may approach him with such terms as may be acceptable to the private respondent. haque (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)