Rakesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3045 of 2023 ====================================================== Rakesh Kumar Son of Late Ganesh Dutta Singh, resident of village- Ghosaith, P.O. and P.S. - Piri Bazar, District - Lakhisarai. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Principal Secretary, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

4.

The Deputy Secretary, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

5.

The Chief Engineer-02, Rural Works Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

6.

The Superintending Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Circle, Munger.

7.

The Executive Engineer, Rural Works Department, Works Division, Lakhisarai.

8.

The District Magistrate, Lakhisarai, District - Lakhisarai. 9.

The District Planning Officer, Lakhisarai, District - Lakhisarai. 10.

The Superintendent of Police, Lakhisarai, District - Lakhisarai. 11.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Lakhisarai, District - Lakhisarai. 12.

The Circle Officer, Surajgarha, District - Lakhisarai. 13.

The Station Head Officer, Piri Bazar Police-Station, District - Lakhisarai. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Pravina Kumari, Advocate For the State :

Md. Khurshid Alam, AAG-12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-07-2024 Heard Ms. Pravina Kumari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Md. Khurshid Alam, learned counsel appearing for the State.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CWJC No.3045 of 2023(6) dt.30-07-2024 2/2 during pendency of this writ application the grievance of the petitioner has been redressed, and as such, the present writ application has become infructuous. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this writ application.

3. Permission is accorded.

4. This writ application is dismissed as withdrawn as having become infructuous.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) ajay/- U