Patna High CourtC. REV./127/2016dismissed

Devendra Mohan Jha Assistant Engineer v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-09-28Mr. Justice Jyoti Saran2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Review No.127 of 2016 ====================================================== Devendra Mohan Jha, Assistant Engineer (Dismissed), Ganga Pump Canal Division No.2, Munger, son of late Brajnath Jha, resident of VillageKoilakh, P.S.- Rajnagar, District- Madhubani. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Secretary/Commissioner, Department of Water Resources, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3. Secretary, Cabinet Secretariat, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4. Dy Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

5. Chief Engineer, Research and Training, Water Resources Department, Khagaul, Patna.

6. Executive Engineer, Ganga Pump Canal Division No.2, Munger.

7. Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division No.2, Jhajha, Jamui.

8. Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division Garhi, Munger. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Navjot Yeshu For the Opp. Party/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 28-09-2016 Heard the parties.

The petitioner seeks to pray for review of the judgment and order passed in CWJC No.13420 of 2002. The writ petition was dismissed vide judgment and order passed on 12.5.2009 on merits. The order was questioned in LPA No.1193 of 2009 which again was dismissed on 14.9.2009 and since an observation was made by the Division Bench that if there would be any issue recorded in the judgment of the learned Single Judge which would transpire to be incorrect, then the appropriate remedy for the petitioner would be to approach the

Patna High Court C. REV. No.127 of 2016 (4) dt.28-09-2016 Court concerned, that he has filed the review petition. The liberty was granted to the petitioner as back as on 14.9.2009 and it is almost seven years thereafter that the petitioner has woken from his slumber to prefer this review application which is hopelessly delayed and is dismissed in limine. (Jyoti Saran, J) SKPathak/- U