Patna High CourtC. REV./97/2019withdrawn

Mantosh Kumar Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

2025-04-24Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CIVIL REVIEW No.97 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1625 of 2016 ====================================================== Mantosh Kumar Mahto S/o Sri Dina Mahto Resident of village - Pipari Singhai, Police Station - Panapur, District - Saran at Chapra ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 2.

Agriculture Produce Commissioner Department of Agriculture, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 3.

Director Agriculture Department of Agriculture, Govt. of Bihar, Patna 4.

The District Magistrate Saran cum Chairman, Kishan Salahkar Selection Committee, Saran at Chapra 5.

Joint Director Department of Agriculture, Saran Division, Saran at Chapra 6.

Kishan Salahkar Selection Committee Saran at Chapra through its Chairman 7.

The District Agriculture Officer cum Member Secretary Kishan Salahkar Selection Committee, Saran at Chapra 8.

The District Development Commissioner cum Member Kishan Salahkar Selection Committee, Saran at Chapra ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Saroj Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sarvesh Kumar Singh, AAG-13 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 24-04-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The present petition has been preferred:

(i) for Review of the order dated 14.2.2019 passed in C.W.J.C. no. 1625 of 2016, by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Madhuresh Prasad (as his Lordship then was) whereby and where under the writ petition is dismissed stating

Patna High Court C. REV. No.97 of 2019(6) dt.24-04-2025 2/2 that the termination order of petitioner dated 1/12/2015 passed in compliance of CWJC No.

20131/2013 the Hon'ble court is not inclined to interfere in the matter and dismissed the writ petition, specifically stating as, "there is no occasion for this Court at the moment to interfere with the cancellation of his selection under the impugned order dated 1.12.2015 passed in compliance of CWJC No. 20231 of 2013";

(ii) the petitioner further prays for any other relief/reliefs for which the petitioner entitled in the facts and circumstances of case be also given.

3. After some argument, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for withdrawal of the petition.

4. Accordingly, the same is dismissed as withdrawn. (Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U