← Library
Patna High CourtMJC/5310/2018dfd for non appearance

Sunita Kumari @ Sunita Devi v. The State Of Bihar Through R. K. Mahajan, Secretary, Primary Education, Education Department, Govt.

2023-07-19Mr. Justice Sudhir Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.5310 of 2018 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8787 of 2018 ====================================================== Sunita Kumari @ Sunita Devi, wife Late Manoj Kumar, Resident of VillageShanti Nagar, P.S. Maner, Dist.-Patna. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through R. K. Mahajan, Secretary, Primary Education, Education Department, Govt. Bihar, Patna.

2.

R. K. Mahajan, The Secretary, Primary Education, Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3.

Sanjay Aggarwal, The District Magistrate, Patna. 4.

Jyoti Kumar, The District Education Officer, Patna (Bihar). 5.

Keshav Kumar, The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Patna, Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

6.

Manoj Kumar Rai, The Mukhiya, Gram Panchayat Raj, Gyaspur, Maner, Patna.

7.

Kavita Kumari, The Block Education Officer, Maner, Patna. 8.

Basudeo Rai, The Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj, Gayaspur, Maner, Patna.

9.

Shri Kumar Ravi, The District Compassionate Appointment Committee, Patna through its Chairman cum District Magistrate. ... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

None For the State :

Mr. Vinay Kumar Mishra, A.C. to A.A.G. 15 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 19-07-2023 None appears for the petitioner. However, learned counsel for the opposite parties is present.

2. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the State that the show cause and supplementary show cause have already been filed on behalf of the opposite parties in the present application.

Patna High Court MJC No.5310 of 2018(8) dt.19-07-2023 2/2

3. It has further been pointed out that the order dated 02.08.2018, passed in C.W.J.C. No. 8787 of 2018, has already been complied with. Hence, no further order is required to be passed in the present contempt application.

4. Considering the fact that none appears for the petitioner, the present contempt application is dismissed for non-prosecution.

(Sudhir Singh, J) U.K./- U T