Jhanjharpur Anchal Matsyajeevi Sahyog Samittee Ltd v. The State of Bihar

.... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binodanand Mishra, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, AC to S.C.15 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMAR DATTA ORAL ORDER 5 19-11-2013 Heard learned counsels for the parties. It is stated in the supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No.10 that necessary orders were issued and protection granted; sikarmahi started on 11.11.2013 and completed on 12.11.2013, which fact has been informed by the Circle Officer, Jhanjharpur the Sub-Divisional Officer, Jhanjharpur. Patna High Court CWJC No.9003 of 2013 (5) dt.19-11-2013 2 Learned counsel for the petitioners also admits that the sikarmahi has been completed as stated in the supplementary counter affidavit. In the aforesaid circumstances, the relief sought in the writ application has already been obtained by the petitioners and the writ application has become infructuous. It is, accordingly, dismissed as infructuous. Learned counsel for the petitioners at this stage submits that since the settlement of the petitioners is made till the year 2019 the respondents may be directed to provide necessary protection as and when time for sikarmahi arises. It goes without saying that once the settlement is made with the petitioners the respondents would be obliged to ensure that the petitioners are in a position to carry out the sikarmahi from time to time. (Ramesh Kumar Datta, J) spal/-