Sri Mool Chand Singhanchi v. D. B. College, Jai Nagar Through Its Principal And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3219 of 2016 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 6611 of 2011 ====================================================== Sri Mool Chand Singhanchi, son of Late Chhote Lal Singhanchi, resident of Jai Nagar Town, Ward No. 8, P.S. Jai Nagar, Madhubani .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. D. B. College, Jai Nagar through its Principal, P.S. Jai Nagar, Madhubani

2. Lalit Narayan Mithila University through its Vice Chancellor Kameshwar Nagar Darbhanga, P.S. Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Darbhanga

3. The Vice Chancellor, Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Darbhanga, P.S. Lalit Narayan Mithila University, Darbhanga .... ....Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prabhas Ranjan For the Respondent/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 03-05-2017 Heard the counsel for the petitioner in support of the present application which seeks restoration of CWJC No. 6611 of 2011 to its original file and number which stood dismissed for non compliance of the peremptory order dated 28.08.2015 whereunder the petitioner was granted 10 days time to file requisites for issue of notice on respondent nos. 1 to 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that because of overhearing he could not file the requisites within time which however were filed on 22.09.2015.

There is abnormal delay in approaching this Court for

Patna High Court MJC No.3219 of 2016 (2) dt.03-05-2017 2/2 restoration of the writ application which stood dismissed for non compliance of the order dated 28.08.2015. Time granted under the said order for issuance of notice and filing requisites therefor expired in the second week of September, 2015. The present application has been filed several months thereafter. The Court does not find any reasonable explanation therefor. Considering the statements made in the application and submissions made in support thereof, in my opinion, no sufficient ground has been made out for restoration of the writ application by recall of the order dated 28.08.2015.

The restoration application is accordingly rejected. Rejection of the writ application shall not come in the way of the petitioner to file a fresh writ application, if the cause survives.

(Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) HR/- U