Patna High CourtCWJC/16402/2016dismiss for nonprosecution

Rajani Kant v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2018-11-27Mr. Justice Madhuresh Prasad2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16402 of 2016 ====================================================== Rajani Kant son of Sri Rajendra Prasad resident of Village - Sheikhpura, P.S. - Shastrinagar, District - Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of General Administration, Old Secretariat, Bihar, Patna.

2. The Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Secretariat, Bihar, Patna.

3. Rajendra Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Pusa, District - Samastipur - 848125 through its Registrar, RAU Pusa, Samastipur.

4. The Vice Chancellor, Rajendra Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Pusa, District - Samastipur - 848125.

5. The Director (Administration), Rajendra Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Pusa, District - Samastipur - 848125.

6. The In-charge Officer (Establihsment), Rajendra Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Pusa, District - Samastipur - 848125.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the State :

Mr. Tej Pratap Singh, AC to AAG 13 For the University :

Mr. Arvind Ujjwal, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 27-11-2018 The writ petition has been filed for a direction upon the respondents to provisionally appoint the petitioner as Assistant as he has participated in the selection process and also appeared for the interview for appointment pursuant to advertisement no. 02 of 2012 issued by the General Administrative Department of the Rajendra Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Pusa, District - Samastipur. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State. It is specifically stated that the name of the petitioner was not recommended by the selection committee and as such the

Patna High Court CWJC No.16402 of 2016(2) dt.27-11-2018 2/2 appointment letter has not been issued.

Since none appears on behalf of the petitioner, without going into the merits of the submissions made by counsel for the respondents, writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J) Prakash/- U