Patna High CourtCWJC/161/2016dfd for non appearance

Pramod Kumr Mishra And ORS v. The Union Of India And ORS

2017-02-16Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.161 of 2016 ======================================================

1. Pramod Kumr Mishra Son of late Ramesh Prasad Mishra

2. Dinesh Prasad Mishra Son of late Gudar Lal Mishra

3. Pawan Kumar Aacharya son of late Sundar kant Aacharya

4. Annapurna Devi Wife of Sudhir Prasad Mishra

5. Ashok Kumar Mishra Son of late Ram Kinkar Mishra All the resident of Village- Kharhara, Po Kharhara, Police Station- Barahat, District Banka. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Railway (Ministry of Railway ) Rail Bhawan , New Delhi.

2. The Secretary, Department of Railway (Ministry of Railway ) Rail Bhawan , New Delhi.

3. The General Manager, Eastern Railway-17, Netaji subhas Road, Have Street Kolkata , West Bengal.

4. The Chief Administrative Officer(Construction) Eastern Railway-14, Strand Road Kolkata(W.B.)

5. The Deputy General Manager, Eastern Railway-17, Netaji subhas Road, Have Street Kolkata , West Bengal.

6. The Divisional Railway Manager, Eastern Railway Malda(W.B.)

7. The Deputy Chief Engineer(Construction) Eastern Railway, Bhagalpur, Bihar.

8. The State of Bihar.

9. The District Magistrate, Banka.

10. The District land Acquisition Officer, Banka. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Balram Kapri, Advocate. For the Respts No.1 to 7: Mr. Anil Singh, Advocate. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL ORDER 16-02-2017 Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioners.

Learned counsel for the Railways has assisted the Court.

On 28.01.2017, on a joint prayer made, the matter was directed to be listed today and has been taken up.

Patna High Court CWJC No.161 of 2016 (4) dt.16-02-2017 2/2 In view of the aforesaid position, the Court can only presume that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing the matter. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed for nonprosecution. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) AnilKrSinha/- U