Patna High CourtCWJC/17815/2016dfd for non appearance

Laxman Ram v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-01-31Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 17815 of 2016 =========================================================== Laxman Ram S/o Late Gultani Ram, Resident of Bahuhara Kothi, Badhara, Muzaffarpur, P.S. - Muzaffarpur, District - Muzaffarpur, At present residing House of Sri Shrawan Mahto, Dujra Devi Asthan, P.S.- Budha Colony, District - Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary Water Resources, Department Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The Managing Director, Bihar State Construction Corporation Limited, Khawaja Imli, Anisabad, Patna.

3. The Assistant Secretary, Bihar State Construction Corporation Ltd., Patna.

4. The Executive Manager, Bihar State Construction Corporation Ltd. Patna.

5. The Secretary Administration, Bihar State Construction Corporation Ltd., Patna.

6. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar Yadav, Advocate For the Corporation :

Mr. Harsh Vardhan and Mr. Shiv Sundaram, Advocates =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 31-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; State and the Bihar State Construction Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation').

2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the Corporation submitted that the Corporation is undergoing liquidation before the National Company Law Tribunal, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal').

3. The present dispute relating to payment of retrial dues of the petitioner being a liability on the Corporation, has to be

Patna High Court CWJC No.17815 of 2016 dt.31-01-2018 2/2 adjudicated by the Tribunal in the winding up proceeding.

4. Faced with the situation, learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the writ application with liberty to intervene/file an appropriate petition before the Tribunal in the case of winding up of the Corporation.

5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed off as withdrawn with liberty aforesaid.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) Anand Kr.

AFR/NAFR U