Sudisht Narayan Mishra v. The State Of Bihar Through Principal Secretary,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10285 of 2021 ====================================================== Sudisht Narayan Mishra S/o Late Jangi Mishra resident of Village and P.O. - Chanainban, P.S. - Manjhaulia, District- West Champaran (Bihar). ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Department of Health Medical Education and Family Welfare, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 2.

The Principal Secretary, Department of Health Medical Education and Family Welfare, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

3.

The Special Secretary, Health (Prabhari Shakha - 16), Directorate of AYUSH, Bihar, Patna.

4.

The District Indigenous Medical Officer, District Joint Hospital Motihari, Chamda Godam, Raghunathpur, East Champaran- 845433. 5.

The District Account Officer, East Champaran, Motihari. 6.

The Accountant General (A and E), Bihar.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vivek Anand Amritesh, Advocate Mr. Nishant Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

A.G Mr. Nagendra Prasad Yadav (SC-23) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 10-10-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The petitioner has filed the instant application for the following relief(s) :- "1. (i) In the nature of mandamus for directing and commanding the respondents to add increment of 1986 to the pay of the petitioner which has been left out by the mistake of office and to fix last pay of the petitioner as Rs. 48200/- instead of Rs. 45400/- after making necessary correction and further to pay accordingly.

(ii) In the nature of mandamus for directing and

Patna High Court CWJC No.10285 of 2021(3) dt.10-10-2025 2/2 commanding the respondents to send recommendation of 3rd MACP by adding Vikalp (so that the modification in the pension of the petitioner can be done).

(iii) In the nature of mandamus for directing and commanding the respondents to give all the benefits accrue after rectifying the mistake and after adding vikalp in 3rd MACP of the petitioner as has been done in the case of other similarly situated employees.

(iv) For issuance of any other relief/reliefs for which the petitioner is entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case."

3. Mr. Vivek Anand Amritesh, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this application.

4. In view of the above, the application stands dismissed as withdrawn.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Shiv/- U