Arun Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2062 of 2025 ====================================================== Arun Chaudhary, Son of Shayam Sundar Chaudhary, Residence of VillageSikrol, P.O.- Sikrol, Uncle- Chausa, District- Buxar (Bihar). ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Sachiwalya, Patna.

2.

The Principal Secretary, Land Reform and Revenue Department, Govt. of Bihar, Sachiwalya, Patna.

3.

The Principal Secretary, Energy (Electricity) Department, Government of Bihar, Sachiwalya, Patna.

4.

The Chairman, Electricity Department (BSEB), Vidyut Bhawan, Patna, Bihar.

5.

The Chairman and Managing Director, N.T.P.C. Chausa, Buxar (Bihar). 6.

The Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna.

7.

The District Officer, Buxar.

8.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sub-Division, Buxar. 9.

The Manager, N.T.P.C. Chausa, Buxar.

10.

The C.F.O. SJVN Company Pvt. Ltd. Chausa (Buxar). 11.

The Supervisor, SJVN Company Pvt. Ltd. Chausa, (Buxar). ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Prem Ranjan Kumar, Advocate For the N.T.P.C.

:

Mr. Amaresh Kumar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Purushottam Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 10-02-2025 None appears on behalf of the petitioner.

2. Learned Advocate for the State and N.T.P.C. are present.

3. After having gone through the contents of the writ petition, this Court is not in a position to know for what relief has been sought for in the present writ petition and whether the

Patna High Court CWJC No.2062 of 2025(2) dt.10-02-2025 2/2 petitioner was working under SJVN Company Pvt. Ltd., Chausa, Buxar or was an employee of N.T.P.C., Chausa, Buxar.

4. This Court finds that the present writ petition is not properly drafted and thus finding it difficult for the learned counsel for the respondents also to get any instruction, the same stands dismissed, however, the petitioner is at liberty to file a fresh writ petition with clear and concise averments and/or to approach before the competent authority, if so advised.

5. The writ petition stands dismissed.

(Harish Kumar, J) supratim/- U