← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/7008/2017dismiss for nonprosecution

Rakshya Yadav v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2024-09-26Mr. Justice R. P. Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7008 of 2017 ====================================================== Rakshya Yadav son of Nathuni Yadav, Resident of Village- Gangathi Baijnath Bigha, P.S.- Aurangabad, District- Aurangabad. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya.

3.

The Collector, Aurangabad.

4.

The Additional Collector, Aurangabad.

5.

The Deputy Collector Land Reforms, Aurangabad. 6.

The Circle Officer, Block and Circle Aurangabad, District- Aurangabad. 7.

Ram Bilas Yadav, son of Late Jagdish Yadav, Resident of Village- Gangathi Baijnath Bigha, P.S.- Aurangabad, District- Aurangabad. 8.

Raghunandan Mishra, son of Late Mahima Nand Mishra, Resident of Village- Baratpur, P.S.- Aurangabad, District- Aurangabad. 9.

Rajnikant Mishra, son of Nand Kumar Mishra, Resident of VillageChainpur, P.S.- Nabinagar, District- Aurangabad. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Md.Khurshid Alam-AAG12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 26-09-2024 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner. However, counsel for the State is present.

2. From perusal of the peremptory order dated 13.08.2024, it appears that three weeks' time was granted to the petitioner to file substitution petition but, the petitioner failed to file the same within the time prescribed by this Court.

3. Learned counsel for the State submits that the sole

Patna High Court CWJC No.7008 of 2017(4) dt.26-09-2024 2/2 petitioner has already died but, the substitution petition has not been filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner as yet and, hence, the peremptory order dated 13.08.2024 has come into effect.

4. In that view of the matter, the petition stands dismissed for non-compliance of the aforesaid peremptory order dated 13.08.2024.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) rishi/- U