RADHE SHYAM CHAUDHARY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Advocate. Inspite of appearance filed by respondent no.3, his counsel Mr. Md. Fahimuddin is not present in Court inspite of repeated call to oppose the prayer made by the petitioner.

(2.) IT is a peculiar case in which the Sub -divisional Officer, Piro, Bhojpur at Arrah (respondent no.1) has acted with utter disregard of sattled law and has shown his authority in directing the police to un -lock the rented shop of the petitioner and to allow the landlord to enter in the said shop room.

(3.) THE grievance of the petitioner was that even when this Court on 10.8.2000 passed interim order staying the operation of the order of the Sub -divisional Officer dated 3.7.2000, as contained in Annexure -4, the lock of the shop room was broken and the police had seized all the articles of the petitioner, which was in the shop room.