← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/1609/2019dismissed

Anju Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2019-02-13Mr. Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1609 of 2019 ====================================================== Anju Devi, aged about 38 years (Female), wife of Rajesh Kumar Ranjan, resident of Village Paijana, P.S. Ghoshwari, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Food and Civil Supply Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Secretary, Food and Civil Supply Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. The Deputy Secretary, Food and Civil Supply Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. The Divisional Commissioner, Patna Division.

5. The District Magistrate, Patna.

6. The Additional District Magistrate, Patna.

7. The Sub- Divisional Officer, Barh, Patna.

8. District Supply Officer, Patna.

9. The Block Supply Officer, Ghoshwari Block, District- Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Nakul Kumar Jamuar For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Arvind Ujjwal (SC4) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 13-02-2019 This writ application is wholly misconceived and a wrong and misleading statement has been made at the bar in order to get an order from this Court. It is only when the attention of this Court was drawn towards the fact noted in the order dated 08.08.2018 passed in MJC No.379 of 2016 by learned counsel for the State, learned counsel for the petitioner admits that pursuant to the order dated 21.09.2015 passed in CWJC No.6357 of 2014, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Barh passed a reasoned order dated 08.02.2016, as contained in memo no.70 dated 09.02.2016, which is not under challenge in

Patna High Court CWJC No.1609 of 2019(3) dt.13-02-2019 2/2 the present writ application.

This Court would not appreciate this approach on the part of the learned counsel for the petitioner. The writ application as framed cannot be entertained. It is dismissed accordingly.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) arvind/- U