Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 36761 (PAT)

Bhagwan Singh v. The State Of Bihar and Ors

CWJC/6172/2016 · 2026-01-05

Rajiv Roy

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6172 of 2016 ====================================================== Bhagwan Singh Son of Late Bishwananth Singh Resident of Village- Rupanchak Police Station- Hathua, District- Gopalganj. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Collector/District Magistrate, Gopalganj District- Gopalganj. 3. The Director, Mission, State Horticulture Mission, Bihar, Patna. 4. The Assistant Director, Horticulture District- Gopalganj. 5. The District Horticulture, Officer, Gopalganj District- Gopalganj. 6. The Disttrict Agriculturer Officer, Gopalganj District- Gopalganj. 7. The Director, Manas Agriculture and Technology, India Pvt. Ltd. Near Palm View Hospital, Police Sta ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Umesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Gp2- Rajiv Kr.Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 10 05-01-2026 Heard the parties. 2. The present petition has been preferred for the following relief/s: (i) for issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of Mandamus for directing the respondents to remove the defects occurs in the poly house of the petitioner or pay the compensation or repair the poly house; (ii) for issuance of an appropriate writ in nature of mandamus for directing the Patna High Court CWJC No.6172 of 2016(10) dt.05-01-2026 2/2 respondents authorities to pay the compensation to the petitioner; (iii) for issuance of any other appropriate writ/ writs, order/ orders, direction / directions for which the writ petitioner will be found entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. On 13.11.2025, notice was issued to respondent no.7 and the order was peremptory. 4. As the same was not complied, it stood rejected on 04.12.2025. 5. Perused the file, consigned. Ravi/- (Rajiv Roy, J) U