The Union Of India v. Vijay Kumar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CIVIL REVIEW No.50 of 2023 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.816 of 2021 ====================================================== 1.

The Union of India through the General Manager, East Central Railway, Hajipur, District-Vaishali (Bihar).

2.

The General Manager (Personnel) East Central Railway, Hajipur, DistrictVaishali (Bihar). 3.

The Divisional Railway Manager, East Central Railway, Sonepur, P.O.- Sonpur, District-Saran (Bihar).

4.

The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, East Central Railway, Sonepur, P.O.-Sonpur, District-Saran (Bihar).

5.

The Senior Divisional Engineer (Co-Ordination), East Central Railway, Sonepur, P.O.-Sonpur, District-Saran (Bihar). 6.

The Assistant Divisional Engineer (Land), East Central Railway, Sonepur, P.O.-Sonpur, District-Saran (Bihar).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

Vijay Kumar Son of Sheo Prasad Roy, Khalasi under Assistant Divisional Engineer (Land), East Central Railway, Sonepur, P.O.-Sonpur, District-Saran (Bihar).

2.

Yogeshwar Mandal, son of Late Dukhan Mandal, Khalasi under Assistant Divisional Engineer (Land), East Central Railway, Sonepur, P.O.-Sonpur, District-Saran (Bihar).

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sujeet Kumar Sinha, CGC Mr. Ramadhar Shekhar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI) 19-03-2025 The present civil review application is filed on behalf of the Union of India to recall the order dated 28.09.2022 passed in CWJC No. 816 of 2021. On behalf of Union of India Mr.

Patna High Court C. REV. No.50 of 2023(3) dt.19-03-2025 2/2 Sujit Kumar Sinha appeared, however, his senior counsel one Mr. Shankar Verma's name has been shown. After arguing for some time when the matter was dictated, thereafter, counsel sought permission to withdraw the application and it was dismissed as withdrawn. In this backdrop, due to change of panel of counsel on behalf of Union of India Mr. Ramadhar Shekhar has presented this civil review.

2. In respect of filing of civil review petition, the concerned advocate on record who has argued the main matter was required to file. The advocate on record who has filed memo of appearance while taking different stand and now asking for matter to be decided on merit. Such decision has been taken after lapse of about five months. The same is deprecated.

3. Accordingly, present civil review application stands dismissed.

(P. B. Bajanthri, J) (Rajiv Roy, J) GAURAV S./- U