Patna High CourtCWJC/6722/2012dismissed

Manish Bhagat v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-06-29Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6722 of 2012 ====================================================== Manish Bhagat, son of Muraridhar Bhagat, resident of Kalighat Road, P.S. Sadar Darbhanga, District-Darbhanga .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna

2. Director, Account Administration and Self Employment, MANAREGA, D.R.D.A., Vaishali

3. The District Development Officer, Vaishali

4. The District Magistrate, Vaishali

5. The Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, Bihar, Patna .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prakash Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. AC to SC-21 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 29-06-2016 At the very outset, learned State Counsel submits that the present writ petition was filed against the order of termination. However, during pendency of the present writ petition, an appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order of termination was dismissed and, thereafter, the petitioner has filed another writ petition vide C.W.J.C.No. 9924 of 2014. According to learned State Counsel, the present writ petition has become infructuous.

Sri Ajay Thakur, learned counsel, who was assisted by Sri Praveen Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the second writ petition i.e. C.W.J.C.No.9924 of 2014 has

Patna High Court CWJC No.6722 of 2012 (5) dt.29-06-2016 2/2 been filed against the appellate order, but he tried to persuade the Court that the first case i.e. C.w.J.C.No.6722 of 2012 may also be kept pending. The Court is of the opinion that since during pendency of the present writ petition, the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order of termination was dismissed and the same order has been challenged in the second writ petition, no purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending. The present writ petition stands dismissed as the same has become infructuous.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) NKS/- U