Patna High Court
Krishna Kumar Singh @ Krishna Patel @ Krishna Singh PatelversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- GIRIJISH KUMAR
Holding
The petition is dismissed as the petitioner lacks locus standi and no enforceable legal right is infringed.
Summary
The petitioner, Krishna Kumar Singh, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing various Bihar state authorities to adhere to their own earlier decisions and to halt the reconstruction of a drainage system that allegedly raised the level by 1 to 1.5 feet, causing water‑logging at his residence. The petition also asked the court to order demolition of the alleged illegal work and to direct reconstruction in accordance with the court’s earlier guidelines. The High Court examined whether the petitioner possessed a legal right or sufficient locus standi to invoke the court’s jurisdiction under Article 226. It held that the petitioner had no enforceable statutory or legal right and therefore lacked locus standi. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ application without entertaining the substantive reliefs sought.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner has locus standi to file a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
- Whether the court can issue a mandamus directing the state authorities to follow their own prior decisions and guidelines.
- Whether the alleged violation of drainage construction norms warrants judicial intervention.
Subjects
- Article 226
- locus standi
- mandamus
- writ jurisdiction
- drainage construction
- water‑logging
- public authority
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7521 of 2026
======================================================
Krishna Kumar Singh @ Krishna Patel @ Krishna Singh Patel son of Late
Kashi Nath Singh, resident of Mohalla Gandhi Nagar, Ward No. 28, P S
Dehri, District Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Old Secretariat, Bihar,
Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department
Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Principal Secretary, Planning and Development Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
4. The Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Bihar,
Patna.
5. The Secretary, Rural Work Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.
6. The Deputy Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
7. The Collector cum the District Magistrate, Rohtas, District Rohtas.
8. The Sub Divisional Officer, Dehri, District Rohtas.
9. The Executive Officer, Dehri Nagar Parishad, Dehri, District Rohtas.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amar Prakash, Adv.
For the Respondent No.9 : Mr. Avinash Kumar, Adv.
: Mr. Kumar Satyam, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GIRIJISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 25-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
2. The instant writ application has been filed
seeking following reliefs;
“(1) For issuance of a writ in the nature
of Mandamus Commanding the Respondent
authorities to follow their own decisions vide
Patna High Court CWJC No.7521 of 2026(2) dt.25-06-2026
2/3
Letter No. 1597 dated 10.07.2013 issued by the
Respondent No.6 in compliance of the general
orders and guidelines of this Hon’ble Court
dated 19.04.2010 passed C.W.J.C. No. 4839 of
2010 whereby and where under it is clearly
directed to construct the Road and Drainage
without increasing the e xisting level but by
violation the guidelines and different orders of
this Hon’ble Court, the Respondent No. 9 has
wrongly ordered to reconstruct the drainage by
increasing 1 to 1.5 feet high from the existing
level at Ward No. 28, Gandhi Nagar, Dehri on
Sone in the District of Rohtas.
(ii) Further for issuance of an
appropriate writ directing the respondent State
authority to take an appropriate action against
all concerned who have willfully and
deliberately violated the guidelines and are
responsible for construction of drainage
beyond the norms causing severe water logging
near the house of the petitioner.
(iii) Further for issuance of an
appropriate writ directing to the respondent
No.2 to enquire in to the matter immediately
and by ensuring demolition of wrong
construction, issue a direction to the
Respondent No.9 for reconstruction work in
accordance with the guidelines.
(iv) Further for issuance of an
appropriate, writ/ order/ direction for which
the petitioner be found entitled to under the
facts and circumstances of the case.”
3. Considering the nature of prayer made in this
writ application, this Court is of the view that the same does
not warrant interference of this Court in exercise of powers
Patna High Court CWJC No.7521 of 2026(2) dt.25-06-2026
3/3
conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
because there is no legal or statutory right of the petitioner
is invaded or threatened which is condition precedent for
maintainability of writ application. The petitioner has no
locus standi in the matter, therefore, the writ application
deserves to be dismissed.
4. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed.
(Girijish Kumar, J)
brajesh/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.