Power Grid Corporation Of India Limited vs The State Of Bihar & Ors.

Date : 18-08-2026

The Writ petition is filed for challenging the order of the District Magistrate dated 26.08.2014, passed in Misc. Case No.51 of 2013 (Sunil Kumar Singh Vs Power Grid Corporation of India Limited) and consequential order dated 28.05.2015 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Jamui by which it has been held that over the area of 2.8 decimals, pole has been erected and land is being used by petitioner company.

It is the specific contention of the Learned counsel for the petitioner that the District Magistrate has no power to pass such an order and that, instead, such power is vested with the District Judge. It is, therefore, contended that the order passed by the District Magistrate is not maintainable in the eye of law.

Heard the Learned counsel for the petitioner, Learned Senior counsel for respondent No. 7; Sri Rajesh Kr. Singh, as well as the Learned counsel for the State. Perused the records.

It is the specific contention of the Learned Senior counsel for respondent No. 7 that the District Magistrate passed the order in compliance with the order passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CWJC No. 3086 of 2003 dated 15.12.2010. It is further contended that the said order was passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court with the consent of the Learned counsel for the petitioner, whereby the District Magistrate was directed to pass an appropriate order. In compliance thereof, the District Magistrate passed the impugned order and, therefore, there is no illegality in the order passed by the District Magistrate.

At this juncture, the Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the consent was given under a “mistake” and that the petitioner may be permitted to prefer a review application against the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CWJC No. 3086 of 2003 dated 15.12.2010 and the order dated 21.08.2013 passed in Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No. 3732 of 2011 in CWJC No. 3086 of 2003 and with that liberty, the petitioner intends to withdraw the present Writ petition.

Considering the plea of the petitioner that he intends to withdraw the Writ petition with a liberty to challenge the orders passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court by way of a review application, liberty is granted to the petitioner.

With the abovesaid liberty, the Writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, subject to the limitation.

Interlocutory application(s), if any, shall also stands disposed of.