← Library
Patna High CourtMJC/605/2025allowed

Ms. Fauzia Tabassum v. The State Of Bihar

2025-11-28Justice Smt. G. Anupama Chakravarthy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.605 of 2025 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12992 of 2016 ====================================================== Ms. Fauzia Tabassum Daughter of Md. Sayed Uddin Resident of Old Azimabad Colony, P.S. Sultanganj, District Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Engineer-in-Chief-cum-Additional-Commissioner-cum-Special Secretary, Road Construction, Department, Bihar Patna.

3.

Superintending Engineer, Central Circle, Road Construction Department, Bihar, Patna 4.

Assistant Engineer, Patna City, Road Division, Gulzarbagh, Patna. 5.

The Collector, Patna. x 6.

The Senior Deputy Collector, General Section, Collectorate, Patna 7.

The Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, Registered through the Senior Regional Manager Retail ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anuj Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Government Advocate 13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY ORAL ORDER 28-11-2025

1. This Court has passed oral order dated 31.10.2025 which reads as follows:

1. The Office Notes dated 11.04.2025 disclose that defects Nos.

3, 5, 9 and 21 have not yet been removed.

2. Two weeks' time is granted to the Learned counsel for the petitioner to remove the defects, failing which the MJC No. 605 of 2025 shall stand dismissed. If defects are removed within the stipulated period of time, the Writ petition shall stand

Patna High Court MJC No.605 of 2025(4) dt.28-11-2025 2/2 restored.

2. The Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that defect nos. 3, 5, 9 and 21 have been removed. He further stated that the matter was not noticed and, as none appeared, it was dismissed for default and non-prosecution. It is also contended by the Learned counsel for the petitioner that there is a fair chance of succeeding in the case unless the matter is restored.

3. Considering the fact that the petitioner has merit in the writ petition, the dismissal order dated 31.10.2025 is hereby set aside, and the Registry is directed to restore the writ petition. (G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J) Amandeep/- U