S. Chandrashekhar, J. - (1.) Aggrieved by order dated 29.8.2013, the present writ petition has been filed. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a copy of order dated 29.8.2013 was not served upon the petitioner. No enquiry was conducted in the matter and on mere suspicion, the Gumti allotted to the petitioner was closed. It is submitted that the petitioner was allotted a Gumti admeasuring 10' x 10' in the Civil Court premises at Dhanbad on payment of Rs. 500/ - per year as rent. Initially, the licence was granted for one year and subsequently it was renewed from time to time.
(2.) Order dated 29.8.2013 discloses that a complaint was made by the Hajat In -Charge, Sadar Court that the petitioner is indirectly involved in immoral traffic activities. The petitioner was called and questioned and it was found that his conduct is doubtful. On the order of Principal District Judge, Dhanbad, Gumti allotted to the petitioner was closed on 18.3.2013. Considering the aforesaid facts, the plea raised on behalf of the petitioner that no show cause notice was issued to the petitioner nor an enquiry was conducted in the matter, is liable to be rejected. The functioning of the Civil Court must be free from polluted activities and in cases like the present one mere suspicion is sufficient to take necessary action. In the writ petition, the petitioner has not alleged any personal enmity with the Principal District Judge. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.;